mrchamp (![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} mrchamp) wrote,@ 2008-03-28 03:59:00 |
|
Representative Democracy vs. Pure Democracy
It has occurred to me on more than one occasion that our type of democracy is very flawed. We use representatives, delegates, superdelegates, and other elected people to go to a fancy gathering place to vote how we just voted. We do this for no other reason that I can think of than that of convenience. So many factors seem to be important in this primary process right now: state contests won, popular vote, pledged delegate count, superdelegate count, overall delegate count, momentum, and others. But which of these factors should actually determine who gets the nomination, presidency, or other sought after position?
The answer lies in the very concept our country was founded on: We the People. Not we the momentum. Not we the delegates OF the people. Not we the states. People, people, people. Now, I am certainly not suggesting that states should not have rights or anything to that effect. What I am saying that since the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, that people should always trump everything else. If we use representatives to vote for us, then each one has to represent exactly the same number of people for whom they are voting. It cannot be approximated, rounded up or down, or otherwise partially or wholly disregarded. It must be exact. And that number could look something like 2,983.558439321508408325 or be much longer. If people are misrepresented in any way, then their votes can effectively be lost. Does every vote truly count as many claim, or is it simply a cliche? The answer should be obvious. Both Michigan and Florida are on the verge of being completely discounted because of decisions made by a few elite officials. See how easily votes can be lost under this system? If this was a pure democracy, it would be as simple as us going to the voting booths and then tallying them up on a state by state basis, and then adding them all up. Least chance of lost votes, least chance of disenfranchisement, least chance of controversy.
Solution: abolish the electoral college and the delegate system altogether and create something else if we insist on staying as a representative democracy. Let's at least completely bind the representatives to doing the public's will. At the very least, we have to abolish the superdelegates. No one should be free to "vote their conscience" as a REPRESENTATIVE of the people. That is a complete contradiction. If you want to vote your conscience, then you can step down and just become a regular voting citizen like the rest of us, where your vote counts the same as mine.
My bottom line: My vote is my own; you don't get to take it and "chew on it" only to vote some other way. You represent accurately, or you don't represent. Period.
It has occurred to me on more than one occasion that our type of democracy is very flawed. We use representatives, delegates, superdelegates, and other elected people to go to a fancy gathering place to vote how we just voted. We do this for no other reason that I can think of than that of convenience. So many factors seem to be important in this primary process right now: state contests won, popular vote, pledged delegate count, superdelegate count, overall delegate count, momentum, and others. But which of these factors should actually determine who gets the nomination, presidency, or other sought after position?
The answer lies in the very concept our country was founded on: We the People. Not we the momentum. Not we the delegates OF the people. Not we the states. People, people, people. Now, I am certainly not suggesting that states should not have rights or anything to that effect. What I am saying that since the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, that people should always trump everything else. If we use representatives to vote for us, then each one has to represent exactly the same number of people for whom they are voting. It cannot be approximated, rounded up or down, or otherwise partially or wholly disregarded. It must be exact. And that number could look something like 2,983.558439321508408325 or be much longer. If people are misrepresented in any way, then their votes can effectively be lost. Does every vote truly count as many claim, or is it simply a cliche? The answer should be obvious. Both Michigan and Florida are on the verge of being completely discounted because of decisions made by a few elite officials. See how easily votes can be lost under this system? If this was a pure democracy, it would be as simple as us going to the voting booths and then tallying them up on a state by state basis, and then adding them all up. Least chance of lost votes, least chance of disenfranchisement, least chance of controversy.
Solution: abolish the electoral college and the delegate system altogether and create something else if we insist on staying as a representative democracy. Let's at least completely bind the representatives to doing the public's will. At the very least, we have to abolish the superdelegates. No one should be free to "vote their conscience" as a REPRESENTATIVE of the people. That is a complete contradiction. If you want to vote your conscience, then you can step down and just become a regular voting citizen like the rest of us, where your vote counts the same as mine.
My bottom line: My vote is my own; you don't get to take it and "chew on it" only to vote some other way. You represent accurately, or you don't represent. Period.
