Evolution of Governments

Think of it as a series of promotions. Do a good job and you get promoted to the next level.How's it going?

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

The question in my mind is how do you get representatives that are representative of the population they represent?One way would be a lottery -- that would pretty well ensure a mix of male\female. white\blac\native\latino\asian\etc, old\young, etc from the district. Service would be like jury duty. This would eliminate primaries, election ads, and prevent money from biasing elections.This would work well for a large body (like the house of representatives), but not so well for smaller positions (senators, governors, presidents): one wacko a president could be disastrous.One idea that has been evolving in my mind recently is having a review process -- everyone in a district reviews the policies voted on by their representative and marks how they would have voted: if the majority don't agree with the representatives record then they can't run for reelection. In other words you could be pre-primary rejected We could combine these ideas of lottery with a review process, and still incorporate voting:So you start with local representatives, such as a Town or County Council, one councilor for every 1000 people or so, picked by lottery.The three who best reflect the views of the towns people (per review) become candidates for mayor for the following year, the old mayor becomes a representative in the state government, with a two year term (so each town\county is represented by two ex-mayors). Voters have one 'yes' vote and one 'no' vote for mayor.Of those representatives that finish their second year, the three who best reflect the views of the state population (per review) become candidates for lieutenant-governor for the following two-year term, the previous lieutenant-governor becomes governor, the old governor becomes a senator representing the state in the federal government with a four-year term (so each state is represented by two ex-governors). Voters again have one 'yes' vote and one 'no' vote for lieutenant-governor.The rest of the state government representatives that have finished their second year all get thrown into a pot for selection to the federal government house of representatives, which is chosen by lottery, and where they serve another two-year term.Of those senators that finish their fourth year, the three who best reflect the views of the national population (per review) become candidates for vice-president for the following four-year term, the previous vice-president becomes president, the old president retires. Voters again have one 'yes' vote and one 'no' vote for vice president.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : consistency

Stealing my idea! But with modifications....

I'll gladly share any ideas that would lead to a better system than either American or Parliamentarian representative democracy.We've had a few centuries to think about this, and we've had a few centuries of seeing what the faults in the existing systems are ...Enjoy

Forced public service? What a terrible system. People with genuinely good ideas may have no chance to serve, and you can even more easily than now end up with an election in which no candidate is desirable. Why even have representatives then if you're just going to have people voting on everything themselves anyway? Since their vote is already being cast, it would be better to eliminate the middle man in the first place and just send the vote in to Congress. So a system in which the political officers become even more bureaucratic and politically bloated than they are now?No thanks.

Would it pretty much guarantee a room full of inexperienced legislators? Why are we picking these guys at random? Almost any system that considers the merits of these officials would have to be better than random picking. So you think there is some number between 100 and 435 where this system makes starts making sense?How would you like it if your city government was randomly picked? Can you see any downside to that?

In my system each next level up is only randomly drawn from the level below, so by the time you get to the top, you have experience.Also no one would be forced to serve. And any hanky-panky kicks you out of the system.

Some minor changes to apply to today:

quote:

---

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

​

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these ColoniesStates; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great BritainCorporatist Oligarchy is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

---

1. The infusion of excessive amounts of money into the election process, and the subsequent corruption of politicians accepting such funding, so that they obey the dictates of corporations rather than the public they are elected to represent,
2. The absurd idea that a corporation should have any voice in elections of representatives of the people, corporations that are multinational oligarchies or minor dictatorships, corporations where the control is in the hands of a few,
3. The passage of laws that suppress the rights of people to protest and restrict the actions of corporations when it is in the public interest to do so,
4. The passage of laws that suppress the rights of all citizens to vote or have proper access to the means to vote,
5. etc

Feel free to add to this list ...

quote:

---

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

---

So is it time to hold Constitutional Conventions to evolve to an even more perfect Union?Enjoy

You are creating exactly the kind of system that we should be working to get rid of: one of career politicians of certified ineptitude.The current system, even with its drawbacks (and it has many, don't get me wrong) is preferable to yours (or RAZD's, you two can fight for the credit).

The things you listed could be handled with laws. There's no need to rewrite or amend anything to implement these policies. And there is certainly no need to resort to declaring a new independence just because there are a few things you'd like to see fixed with the nation as it is. I think most folks are already interested in doing these things (politicians included); they just can't agree on how to do them, like whether 'general' refers to 99% of people or just 1% or whether 'welfare' includes food or just a cardboard box.Joking aside, though, I think we can say that the principles already in place are largely recognized as being pursuit-worthy; I don't think more will help. We don't need more principles; we need more actions true to the ones we already have.Edited by Jon, : No reason given.

People with good ideas can present them, they don't have to be in government to have good ideas. Unlike the current two-party system which essentially guarantees it? There could be basic qualifications -- high school education (or higher), reality testing (old earth, climate change, evolution, etc). In the original document it was expected that all voters were well educated gentlemen ... so the only requirements were age and nation of birth. Because you do it all in one go, and review the past actions, allowing the representatives to act as proxies in between, easier on the public, allows some hindsight, and it allows the best of the batch to rise to the next level. How does this result in bloated bureaucracy when the best of the pack at representing the people are chose for the next level?There are no lifetime positions, unlike the current system. So you think the currently "certified ineptitude" corporate lackey politicians can pass laws that affect them negatively. Interesting. How does that happen? And how do you propose to achieve that end with the currently "certified ineptitude" corporate lackey politicians and polarized population? Who said anything about creating a NEW independence rather than asserting proper recognition of existing rights and working towards a MORE perfect union than what we currently have?Evolution of government works inside the system to improve it rather than waiting for it to become intolerable to the point that bloody revolution occurs. That is why we have an amendment process, yes?Enjoy

If the government is of the people by the people for the people, then who better to represent hard working people than hard working people, with a large enough sample so that differences of opinion tend to represent how people in general feel -- as is used in surveys. There is a point below with sample population is not as good as representing the overall population. I can see a system where you start with 10 people selected at random for 5 positions that are then chosen by voting the ones you don't want to be "kicked off the island" -- like the reality shows. (I think this would work well for primaries btw). This would be similar to the way a jury is picked, except with the people voting instead of the lawyers.In university we had a "new" organization of dorms into "independent" dorms as alternatives to fraternities. One of them chose to admit people by lottery and chose leaders by lottery, and there was no real difference to the others that used more normal democratic systems. Their success has always stuck in my mind as a lesson.Enjoy. Edited by RAZD, : ..

Government is generally a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't situation. Power corrupts, no matter how you got it.