Editing Voting Rights in the U.S.

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in.

Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 3: Line 3:
 
==Collaborative-UNICE: Voting Rights in the U.S.==   
 
==Collaborative-UNICE: Voting Rights in the U.S.==   
  
 
+
[[File:UNICE-Universal Network of Intelligent Conscious Entities-image.jpg|thumb|right||250px|[[UNICE global brain project]]]]  
[[File:UNICE logo.jpg|thumb|right|275px|[[UNICE global brain project]]]]
+
  
  
Line 14: Line 13:
 
'''1. “Winner-take-all” and “first-past-the-post” are terms for the undemocratic plurality voting system''' passed down from Great Britain to its former colonies. Combined with the presidential system, it forces voters to choose between two factions of a ruling elite, doesn’t require a majority winner, and makes spoilers out of all who dare challenge it. <ref>Arth, Michael E., ''Democracy and the Common Wealth: Breaking the Stranglehold of the Special Interests''. Chapter 15: “Replace Winner-Take-All,” Golden Apples Media, 2010. pp. 108-117.</ref>  
 
'''1. “Winner-take-all” and “first-past-the-post” are terms for the undemocratic plurality voting system''' passed down from Great Britain to its former colonies. Combined with the presidential system, it forces voters to choose between two factions of a ruling elite, doesn’t require a majority winner, and makes spoilers out of all who dare challenge it. <ref>Arth, Michael E., ''Democracy and the Common Wealth: Breaking the Stranglehold of the Special Interests''. Chapter 15: “Replace Winner-Take-All,” Golden Apples Media, 2010. pp. 108-117.</ref>  
  
'''2. The Electoral College is an inherently undemocratic compromise made to appease slave states''' at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. It does not allow voters to directly choose their president, warps campaigns by causing candidates to focus on swing states to the exclusion of others, distorts governance, helps suppress parties outside the two-party duopoly, creates spoilers, and does not allow representation according to population, just to name a few of the worst effects.<ref>Edwards III, George C. “Five myths about the Electoral College.” The Washington Post, November 2, 2012.</ref> <ref> Brodarick, Taylor, “It’s time to abolish The Electoral College,” Forbes, November 4, 2012.</ref>
+
'''2. The Electoral College is an inherently undemocratic compromise made to appease slave states''' at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. It does not allow voters to directly choose their president, warps campaigns, distorts governance, helps suppress parties outside the two-party duopoly, creates spoilers, and does not allow representation according to population, just to name a few of the worst effects.<ref>Edwards III, George C. “Five myths about the Electoral College.” The Washington Post, November 2, 2012.</ref> <ref> Brodarick, Taylor, “It’s time to abolish The Electoral College,” Forbes, November 4, 2012.</ref>
  
'''3. Private money corrupts elections and government:''' Politicians spend much, if not most, of their their time begging for money,<ref>Carlson, Margaret "Book review: Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig offers plan to smash culture of money in politics". Bloomberg News, Chicago Tribune. December 26, 2011 Retrieved 2-15-15.</ref> and thinking of ways to serve their corporate masters, all the while distracting the people with war-making, and emotional, religious or nationalistic appeals.  Members of Congress spend 2-3 years raising money before they run for office and then spend 3 out of 5 days a week raising money thereafter. Private campaign spending creates a mud-slinging media circus among disreputable candidates who are forced to sell out to become part of the show. <ref>Arth, Michael E., ''Democracy and the Common Wealth'', Chapter 6: “Take Money Out of Politics,” Golden Apples Media, 2010. pp. 76-85.</ref>  
+
'''3. Private money corrupts elections and government:''' Politicians spend much, if not most, of their their time begging for money<ref>Carlson, Margaret "Book review: Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig offers plan to smash culture of money in politics". Bloomberg News, Chicago Tribune. December 26, 2011 Retrieved 2-15-15.</ref> Lessing reports that members of Congress spend 2-3 years raising money before they run for office and then spend 3 out of 5 days a week raising money thereafter.  and thinking of ways to serve their corporate masters, all the while distracting the people with war-making and emotional, religious or nationalistic appeals. Private campaign spending creates a mud-slinging media circus among disreputable candidates who are forced to sell out to become part of the show. <ref>Arth, Michael E., ''Democracy and the Common Wealth'', Chapter 6: “Take Money Out of Politics,” Golden Apples Media, 2010. pp. 76-85.</ref>  
  
'''4. Corruption Perception Index:''' According to Transparency International, in 2016 (even before the inauguration of President Trump), the U.S. ranked 18th on the Corruption Perception Index,<ref>Transparency International, “Corruption Perceptions Index 2016,” http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2016#table</ref> mostly due to issues related to its electoral system and the politicians produced by it.<ref> Transparency International, Corruption in the U.S., http://www.transparency.org/country#USA</ref>  Estimates on the average “return on investment”  for money spent on lobbying and political campaigns range between 600% and 22,000%.<ref> Lessig, Lawrence. Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress -- and a Plan to Stop It., Twelve, 2011,  p.117. ISBN 978-0-446-57643-7.</ref>
+
'''4. Corruption Perception Index:''' According to Transparency International, in 2014 the U.S. ranked 17th on the Corruption Perception Index,<ref>Transparency International, “Corruption Perceptions Index 2014: Results,” http://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results</ref> mostly due to issues related to its electoral system and the politicians produced by it.<ref> Transparency International, Corruption in the U.S., http://www.transparency.org/country#USA</ref>  Estimates on the average “return on investment”  for money spent on lobbying and political campaigns range between 600% and 22,000%.<ref> Lessig, Lawrence. Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress -- and a Plan to Stop It., Twelve, 2011,  p.117. ISBN 978-0-446-57643-7.</ref>
  
 
'''5. Freedom of speech is abridged:''' According to Reporters Without Borders, the U.S. ranked 49th in world press freedom rankings, behind such countries as Niger, Burkino Faso and Botswana.<ref>Greenwald, Glenn, “U.S. drops to 49th in world press freedom rankings worst since Obama became president,” The Intercept, Feb. 12, 2015, [https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/12/u-s-drops-49th-world-press-freedom-rankings-second-lowest-ever/]</ref>  <ref> Reporters Without Borders, 2015 World Press Freedom Index:http://index.rsf.org/#!/index-details</ref> Privately-owned media receives huge benefits from campaign advertising, and tends to “sell wars, spin elections, and destroy democracy.”<ref> McChesney, Robert W,  and John Nichols, Tragedy and Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy, 2005</ref> Investigative journalism is expendable because it’s not profitable. Big media is so unconcerned about this that it took Comedy Central’s The Daily Show to report that CNN has eliminated its investigative news department.<ref> The Daily Show, “Investigating Investigative Journalism” http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/4d109s/investigating-investigative-journalism</ref>
 
'''5. Freedom of speech is abridged:''' According to Reporters Without Borders, the U.S. ranked 49th in world press freedom rankings, behind such countries as Niger, Burkino Faso and Botswana.<ref>Greenwald, Glenn, “U.S. drops to 49th in world press freedom rankings worst since Obama became president,” The Intercept, Feb. 12, 2015, [https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/12/u-s-drops-49th-world-press-freedom-rankings-second-lowest-ever/]</ref>  <ref> Reporters Without Borders, 2015 World Press Freedom Index:http://index.rsf.org/#!/index-details</ref> Privately-owned media receives huge benefits from campaign advertising, and tends to “sell wars, spin elections, and destroy democracy.”<ref> McChesney, Robert W,  and John Nichols, Tragedy and Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy, 2005</ref> Investigative journalism is expendable because it’s not profitable. Big media is so unconcerned about this that it took Comedy Central’s The Daily Show to report that CNN has eliminated its investigative news department.<ref> The Daily Show, “Investigating Investigative Journalism” http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/4d109s/investigating-investigative-journalism</ref>
Line 30: Line 29:
 
'''9. Felons and ex-felons are denied voting rights''', which interferes with rehabilitation, disproportionately affects blacks and minorities, and is harmful to society.<ref>Felon Voting, pros and cons. felonvoting.procon.org.</ref>  
 
'''9. Felons and ex-felons are denied voting rights''', which interferes with rehabilitation, disproportionately affects blacks and minorities, and is harmful to society.<ref>Felon Voting, pros and cons. felonvoting.procon.org.</ref>  
  
'''10. Voter apathy and disgust:''' Around 60% of eligible voters are presumably so disgusted by some combination of all of the above, they don’t bother to vote, and the other 40% has to choose between the lesser of two evils in single member elections. Turnout of age-eligible citizens in statewide primaries is even worse, averaging less than 15% in 25 statewide primaries in 2014.<ref>Camia, Catalina, “Study: Voter apathy could mean record-low turnout in some states.” USA Today Politics, quoting the results of a study by the Center for the Study of the American Electorate. July 21, 2014.</ref> All three branches of government were at record low approval ratings in June 2014, with the presidency and the supreme court at 29% and 30%, respectively, and Congress at 7%.<ref>McCarthy, Justin, “Americans losing confidence in all branches of U.S. Gov’t,” Gallup. June 30, 2014.</ref>
+
'''10. Voter apathy and disgust:''' Around 60% of eligible voters are presumably so disgusted by some combination of all of the above, they don’t bother to vote, and the other 40% has to choose between the lesser of two evils in single member elections. Turnout of age-eligible citizens in statewide primaries is even worse, averaging less than 15% in 25 statewide primaries in 2014.<ref>Camia, Catalina, “Study: Voter apathy could mean record-low turnout in some states.” USA Today Politics, quoting the results of a study by the Center for the Study of the American Electorate. July 21, 2014.</ref> All three branches of government were at record low approval ratings in June 2014, with the presidency and the supreme court at 29% and 30%, respectively, and Congress at 7%.<ref>McCarthy, Justin, “Americans losing confidence in all branches of U.S. Gov’t,” Gallup. June 30, 2014.</ref>  
 +
 
  
 
==Solutions:==
 
==Solutions:==
Line 40: Line 40:
 
'''3. Abolish the Electoral College''' and replace it with direct, ranked choice voting in presidential elections.<ref>Black, Eric, “10 reasons why the Electoral College is a problem,” MinnPost, October 16, 2012</ref>
 
'''3. Abolish the Electoral College''' and replace it with direct, ranked choice voting in presidential elections.<ref>Black, Eric, “10 reasons why the Electoral College is a problem,” MinnPost, October 16, 2012</ref>
  
'''4. Ban private money from electoral politics:''' Replace with publicly financed, highly-regulated campaigns. Create standardized candidate profiles online, requiring all candidates to provide everything voters should know. All citizens without the internet should be provided with online access and instructed in its use through public libraries. Provide ranked-choice pre-voting of candidates so voters can winnow the field in preparation for publicly funded debates and other access to the candidates.<ref>Arth, Michael E., ''Democracy and the Common Wealth'', Chapter 6: “Take Money Out of Politics,” Golden Apples Media, 2010. pp. 76-85</ref>
+
'''4. Ban private money from electoral politics:''' Replace with publicly financed, highly-regulated campaigns. Create standardized candidate profiles online, requiring all candidates to provide everything voters should know. All citizens without the Internet should be provided with online access and instructed in its use through public libraries. Provide ranked-choice pre-voting of candidates so voters can winnow the field in preparation for publicly funded debates and other access to the candidates.<ref>Arth, Michael E., ''Democracy and the Common Wealth'', Chapter 6: “Take Money Out of Politics,” Golden Apples Media, 2010. pp. 76-85</ref>
  
 
'''5. Discourage influence peddling:''' No person or other entity may offer any politician a bribe, perks, meals, travel, donation, or any other personal incentive. Payments to lobbyists should be so minimal and regulated that it would effectively end the corrupting influence of paid lobbyists and the revolving door in politics. In accordance with the First Amendment, the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, there should be created an easily accessible and free petition process (like [[UNICE global brain project|UNICE]]) for citizens and corporations to make their wishes known.<ref>“Should lobbying be banned from politics?” debate.org. http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-lobbying-be-banned-from-politics</ref> <ref>Arth, Michael E., ''Democracy and the Common Wealth'', Chapter 6: “Take Money Out of Politics,” Golden Apples Media, 2010. pp. 81-82</ref>  
 
'''5. Discourage influence peddling:''' No person or other entity may offer any politician a bribe, perks, meals, travel, donation, or any other personal incentive. Payments to lobbyists should be so minimal and regulated that it would effectively end the corrupting influence of paid lobbyists and the revolving door in politics. In accordance with the First Amendment, the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, there should be created an easily accessible and free petition process (like [[UNICE global brain project|UNICE]]) for citizens and corporations to make their wishes known.<ref>“Should lobbying be banned from politics?” debate.org. http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-lobbying-be-banned-from-politics</ref> <ref>Arth, Michael E., ''Democracy and the Common Wealth'', Chapter 6: “Take Money Out of Politics,” Golden Apples Media, 2010. pp. 81-82</ref>  
Line 46: Line 46:
 
'''6. Protect voting rights:''' No citizen should be denied voting rights, including felons or ex-felons. If the aim of incarceration is about rehabilitation and helping people to rethink their relation to society, then denying voting rights is punitive and has no benefit to society. It also disproportionately affects blacks and minorities. <ref>"Felon Voting, pros and cons," felonvoting.procon.org.</ref>  
 
'''6. Protect voting rights:''' No citizen should be denied voting rights, including felons or ex-felons. If the aim of incarceration is about rehabilitation and helping people to rethink their relation to society, then denying voting rights is punitive and has no benefit to society. It also disproportionately affects blacks and minorities. <ref>"Felon Voting, pros and cons," felonvoting.procon.org.</ref>  
  
'''7. Compulsory Voting:''' All eligible voters should be required to vote in order to: 1. better represent the will of the people; 2. help eliminate the focus on swing voters and; 3.  to increase civic engagement. Binding "none-of-the above" choices, and blank spaces are allowed to circumvent any free speech objections.<ref>Waleed, Aly "Voting Should be Mandatory," New York Times, January 16, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/opinion/voting-should-be-mandatory.html</ref>  A complaint section should also be included on the ballots for direct input by voters. Those of sound mind who do not vote would be subject to fines or community service. Voting day should be a public holiday.
+
'''7. A Voting Rights Amendment would resolve all of these issues.''' (See Wiki-UNICE topic: [Proposed Voting Rights Amendment])
  
'''8. A Voting Rights Amendment would resolve all of these issues.''' (See Wiki-UNICE topic: [Proposed Voting Rights Amendment])
 
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==
  
 
<references/>
 
<references/>

Please note that all contributions to UNICEwiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see UNICEwiki:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Tools