Tuesday, I discussed the most controversial Presidential elections America has ever had, and stated that the system under which we operate is at best inappropriate.
Today, I'm going to illustrate the problems inherent in the system and the steps necessary to correct them. Tuesday, I will post a summary of this plan.
I'll start with the biggest and most seemingly insurmountable problem we have:
Apathy
An apathetic electorate is our first and most powerful enemy.
No one can tell you exactly why apathy reigns in this country. Are we lazy? Is the American Spirit really crushed? Do we honestly believe that the system is so far gone that it'd be a waste of time to try to fight the tide?
Who knows the cause? Moreover, who even cares? Apathy is still a damning problem, but, I have the solution. Don't get turned off — I'll explain how your right to not vote is preserved, so long as you show at the polls.
Solution: make non-voting a criminal act.
Criminal Non-Voting in the First Degree
I have a saying about this:
"I want the threat of pending litigation to loom over the heads of the electorate because the threat of imminent Fascism just doesn't loom hard enough."
The only surefire way to eliminate apathy in every form, from any institution, is to piss off the people who don't care. Then, at least, they feel something instead of nothing.
Aside from having a series of blatantly evil elected officials, the only way to accomplish the annihilation of apathy is to make a list of every single eligible voter, and start ticketing those that don't show at the polls. I think that we should start with a $500 fine and 50 hours community service for the first offense of a missed election, then $700 and 100 hours for the second offense, then $1000, 1000 hours, and it counts as a felony, so the offender loses the ability to vote.
They have fines in Australia, but they're far lower than the ones proposed here.
Why do I think they should be so expensive? Well, why don't you tell me the price of Liberty. There is no such thing as a reasonable penalty for an unreasonable crime; I mean, really, how hard is it to get out of the house and vote?
No election should stand if less than 75% of eligible voters show up. We haven't ever had a quorum in this country; in congress, you can't make a vote count without one, so why do we allow national and state elections to operate without? This makes absolutely no sense.
Any person who calls these "bad ideas," or something similar, has a criminal mind and is against Liberty and should be tarred and feathered, to start with. I'm all for freedom of speech, but to oppose the idea of a fully functioning electorate is madness. Are the people not smart enough? Is that it? Well then, if that's the argument, it seems to me that we need adult education systems. Getting people out to vote is the most important thing imaginable in any shade of Democracy, and anyone who disagrees is a Torie.
Okay, so we have large fines for not voting — seems good to me, but what about you people out there saying that forcing everyone to vote is the act of a tyrant?
That's just silly. Voting isn't a right, it's not a privilege, it's a responsibility, and if you should fail at your responsibilities, shouldn't you be forced to pay somehow?
But, on the other hand, I do agree. Without some changes to the ballot, forcing everyone to vote would be a problem.
New Ballot Features
Okay, first off, we need pictures, platform summaries and short bios for our candidates, so you'll see instantly who you're voting for, where they come from, and what they stand for.
If none of them appeal to you, I have a solution to that as well; a spot for 'none of these guys,' like Nevada and the CIS have. In addition to that, in the candidate column, you have 'Abstain,' which will not count your vote. Just like staying home!
The 'Abstain' choice will also be available for all referendums and other civic choices. I don't care if you don't care, I just want you in the damned polling location.
But, what if a candidate lies, saying one thing on the campaign trail, and another entirely different thing at his desk in the oval office? Like, on the trail, saying he's against nation-building, then going right out and destroying two (2) sovereign nations and ineptly attempting to rebuild them. Can you imagine that happening? I mean, what if it did? It's hilarious just to think about it, but please, stay with me!
The Campaign Contract
This will be necessary to eliminate the liars from the political process; during your campaign, your platform will be summed up and put not only into ballot-form, but also into contract form, which you will be forced to sign before you're allowed to make it on the ballot. The contract becomes void if you lose, but, if you win, it'll be certain to turn you honest.
If at any time you're found to be in breach of this contract, and the Supreme Court determines that it was indeed your fault for doing so, you will be stripped of your office and thrown in jail for the remainder of your Presidency, and the 4-year term to follow. Think of it as a 4-8 stretch.
So many ideas, so hard to organize them all…
The Electoral College
Get rid of it; make the popular vote the thing that counts. Send all those appointees on their bikes. 'Nuff said.
Pluralities
Have a look at the 2000 election. Of the popular vote, both two major candidates got only 49%. That's just wrong.
So, if that happens, we'll have a run-off, not in the House, not in Congress, but in all of America.
You take the candidates that captured the top 75% of the vote, and have them run against each other alone, so you don't get the Nader-effect. Keep doing it until someone grabs 51% of the ballot. This is also done in France, the CIS, and other republics around the globe.
Election Holiday
Given our 'one Tuesday in November' policy, however, people will still have legitimate reasons for not being able to vote on election day, due to time constraints. You can probably guess what my solution to this problem will be, and if you're thinking that absentee ballots aren't enough, you're right.
It is already necessary, in the interest of 100% voter turnout, to move election time from half of the second tuesday in November to the first weekend in November.
In relation to this, I ask: what could be more important than preserving our Liberty? There is no other alternative to new legislation to do so, because even open rebellion will result with a governmental system that needs improving, and absolutely no way to accomplish that without another bloody coup.
This is a good idea also because it forces yet another thing:
Ban On All Pre-Closing Election Reporting
If the polls aren't completely closed in Hawai'i yet, then it's too damned early to be reporting the current count. I don't mind the reporters making their observations as it happens, but they shouldn't dispatch their reports until everyone is finished voting, so everyone in the entire country still has no idea who won, and will therefore try to make their votes count. Just make it illegal for any media outlet to report on the outcome of a national election before the polls are closed.
What will they do in the meantime? Well, seems to me that Governors and Congressmen, not to mention all the thousands of state representatives also need some coverage, and in general, that should be okay, though they should stay away from color-coding them until the Hawai'ian polls are closed, so people don't get the wrong ideas.
The Cost
However much the cost turns out to be to put this system into place, it will be worth it, because we cannot put a price on the very thing that keeps us free.
Let me repeat that:
We cannot put a price on the thing that keeps us free.
