Saturday, December 22, 2007

Getting Out the Vote in Two Ways

Cactus at Angry Bear asks a good question, but could it possibly be rephrased to attain a more positive Answer? Is this not a Question of correct and efficient Parenting skills? A dysfunctional family probably exhibits less success than an institutional framework, while the Later could maximize potential success to the point as it provides real leadership cadres. Under all Cases the process of Parenting relies upon statistical Averaging, which comes into competition with the Concept of personal attainment, concurrent with all systems producing Duds of personal achievement. Should We not be asking whether social mobility ever surpasses the Heredity component of proper Parenting skills however produced?

Mark Thoma brings up an interesting Question: Should Voting be Made Compulsory? He says No, but after reflection, I decided the Answer should be Yes–but with Qualifications. Just like the omnibus bills of the Congress, where the evil is in the fine print of the Conference Reports; the hook should be in the Qualifications to mandatory Voting. The later should alter the entire direction of Voting in the democratic context. The first rule need be that all Candidate are voted upon; in the Primary, Voters will be asked to signify which Candidates are acceptable to Run for the Office, and signify with a No vote those Candidates who the Voter finds unacceptable. Candidates will have to prove their worth as a Candidate; this best spelled out by definition of a clearly outlined program if elected, which the Voters will have the power to review in the upcoming Election.

The last Sentence to the last paragraph holds an essential key to the success of the new Voting process. Candidates will have to articulate a definite program for implementation, Voters will be voting upon Initiatives rather than Candidates, and Voters will cast their Votes for the Candidates themselves by voting No on Candidates found unacceptable. The Winner will be the one with the most Yes votes (least No votes), and the voting Public will make known what Initiatives they would approve, no matter which Candidate advanced the proposals, with expectation that the Winner must adopt all successful proposals, or convince the voting Public that proposal elements are unacceptable or unworkable. Does this sound somewhat like the No Confidence Vote of the British Parliament? lgl

No comments: