-36 votes

Abolish congress and replace with internet voting?

What does everyone think of this idea? The rest of the constitution, separation of powers, etc. would remain intact. Just get rid of congress and instead have everyone either vote directly, or for those who don't want to vote directly, they can allow a representative to vote for them.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Here's one simple way - Simplified

Step 1: Convert all personal, PIN & election information to numbers (aka binary)
Step 2: Multiply all those numbers to obtain a long code.
Step 3: Record that result and email it to authorities early for registration.
Step 4: Repeat with vote choices and secret PIN code.
Step 5: Record that result also.
Step 6: Email codes (Steps 3 & 5) on voting day (or week) to publicly displayed list.
Step 7: Verify your resulting codes are both publicly displayed by authorities AND private activist/news sites.

If they are not, then the first code is used to find the fraudulent location so all those people can re-verify their votes as accurate.

It won't stop the changes taking place but it will expose them instantly.

Does anyone here

have a better idea? How do we make those in Washington and your capitol accountable and Really Represent their people in their States?

Republic of Laws? Yes but The voting System in this Country is about as reliable as expecting a Junkie to show up for work after payday. So we obviously need to do something different.

"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."

"Freedom is Popular"

Ron Paul never voted for an unconstitutional Bill.

To do so is Treason by failing the uphold and defend the Constitution.

We are told the Constitution is the Law of the Land.

Treason puts the bite in the Constitution.

Men voluntarily take the oath. They are bound to it under the Constitution and the Laws of Nations.

Or would be if we consented to the Constitution as the imperfect Law of the Land.

Free includes debt-free!

I hear ya completely.

But If our elections were legit either Ron Paul or Gary Johnson would have probably been elected the GOP candidate. But they weren't. The whole thing was a farce. The Articles of Confederation were drafted and then thrown out. Then the Constitution was drafted and we stuck to it. But We still have an obligation if we value our lives and happiness and security and safety to abolish or alter the Law or Government that fails to do it's job.

"Freedom is Popular"

Going back to paper ba

ballots.. It's not tamper proof but it sure made it a lot harder to cheat. We could pass laws for transparency..

The main problem we have is those in office who are busy figuring out new ways to cheat. It's a moral issue. The whole lot of them are corrupt.

Changing the voting system will only effect a small portion of the sickness.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Given that democracy is two wolves and one sheep voting

on what is for dinner, I would say your proposal might amount to jumping out of the frying pan into the fire.

How about just abolishing the federal government and let people vote with their dollars to get what they want. That cuts out the middleman, and puts the votes in a forum where they have a real effect.

"Bend over and grab your ankles" should be etched in stone at the entrance to every government building and every government office.

I agree!

Let people put there money were their mouth is.

The Bill of Rights was intended to thwart abuses by the government.

Government is the problem. Swat that mosquito.

Free includes debt-free!

tasmlab's picture

Let's abolish congress

Congress, the presidency, and the 4,000,000 other govt employees can be abolished/sent packing and we can use the internet to post vital information about our breakfasts on Facebook.

Currently consuming: Harry Browne, Free Domain Radio; JT Gatto and Holt; Wii U

Such closed minds here

I'm really appalled at the lack of insight of people here.

"...but people are too dumb" Wow, groups are dumb because of interactive peer pressure. A person can be very intelligent. It's that intelligence we have to tap and there are very easy ways to collect individual ideas and opinions without the interference of peer pressure.

"...but that's a democracy and that's two wolves winning" That's simply a non-related argument. What's being proposed is not the rule of democratic votes but the rule of law being voted on by democratic processes. The process of creating a law, statute or budget would remain unchanged except that it would be done BY a different representative of the people. ...namely, all the people themselves.

"...but it's a computer and we all know those can be manipulated"
"...but paper ballots can't be corrupted" Ok, these are simply idealistic comments. Our paper ballot system now gains us absolutely zero accountability of the process. Ballots are lost, disenfranchised, extras are added, entire precincts are forgotten about and we still have hanging chads that inject confusion into the tally. Compare this to VISA/MC where 'to the penny' accounting with less than .2% fraud occurring and you'll see that computers CAN be orders of magnitude more accurate. Also, a computer CAN VERY EASILY ascertain the true wishes of the people by methods like 'ranked' voting of multiple choices (which eliminates voting AGAINST the most evil), and qualified voting which informs the voter of related info while making the choice. It could also, AND WE HERE SHOULD ALL BE AWARE OF THIS ONE, ELIMINATE the multiple levels of candidates. By that I mean no primaries or party selections where our choices are limited by some elite group controlling the nominees. (Sound close to home???)

"...but what happens when we take away one branch of the government?" Again, this is not removing a branch, this is populating it with different people. The process not only remains in place but gains in diversity, experience, long-term memory, legitimacy, current-ness, balance, non-corruptability.

Given what we have now, where corruption is THE NAME OF THE GAME in every law, statute and budget, why would anyone not see the benefit of this? The only consideration in it is that the actual mechanism be transparent (i.e. open source in computer terms) and controlled by the very people it gathers its votes from.

In the area of "just think what it could be like"... consider the changes that would take place if every issue created an online, ongoing and unlimited debate, which then led to an open sourced bill, which then led to a legislative change and the entire process was in a constant state of audit by anyone who cares for Constitutional, merit based and 'will of the people' content.

Under such a system, does anyone here believe that the following practices would have survived very long?: Citizen's United; Posse Comatatus; Fractional Reserve Banking; employer-based insurance; GMOs; cancer cure bans; corporations' legal requirement to put shareholders' income first; two-tiered public stock offerings; domestic drones / military; police altering their motto from 'protect and serve'; unsubstantiated military pre-emptive strikes; Sandy Hook; birther/truther/waco/etc. investigations; and possibly the biggest - SCOTUS appointments.

This is how I would expect an open mind to react to such a proposal.

OK that is the dumbest thing I have ever herd...

EVER!

I am not calling for a pure

I am not calling for a pure democracy. You all realize that our system of government has an element of democracy in it, yes? I am saying I think it is an interesting idea to take this portion of the government's power away from the corrupt politicians and into the hands of the people (who are currently powerless and I would argue have no representation in congress).

Who does the rest?

Who introduces and drafts legislation? Who issues budgets? How will the people be represented? What happens to separation of powers when you remove one of them?

I think the more unattractive aspect of your proposal is that it reinforces federalism. I'm leaning more towards states rights and independence.

Get your preps together! Learn historic food storage and preservation methods and the science that makes them work now, start saving money and the future

Hmm how could this go

Hmm how could this go wrong...

Southern Agrarian

Why be negative?

Why not, "How could this go right?"

Fail to see the problem

I dont know why people are down voting this. If It started with a couple states and caught on it prolly could not be much worse than the current system now. Like the Greeks did One white Stone for Aye and a Black Stone for Nay. We have overcomplicated basic voting in this country. the Current congressional and Assembly system we have know obviously does not work. So like in the beginning we should rewrite some sections in the Constitution and rid the opportunity for corruption.

"Freedom is Popular"

It would be awesome in a world that couldn't lie.

and cheat and steal and commit fraud and murder and start cults that generate black markets of hell..

what a world it would be.

Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right. -Henry Ford

Democracy is 2 wolves and a

Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner. Liberty is a well armed sheep contesting the vote.

“Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.”
― Ron Paul

Bread and Circuses

“Bread and Circuses is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure.

Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state.

For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader—the barbarians enter Rome."

— Robert A. Heinlein

Fortunately for us, history has taught us (or at least you) that

So, if that is your concern, then under the proposed system, you might want to be the watchdog who points out when it begins slipping. Under the right conditions, wouldn't you think that such a warning would get debated on a similar level as the actual issue of the day?

All this would take is for merit to take a higher value than pure opinion. That's very easy to create in any debate structure. And who wouldn't be for that, given your concerns being injected during its design?

Double Post

off topic.

I sent you a pm but never heard back.
I am leaving for new mexico Saturday. HVAC proportional control system retrofit.

If you want a democracy

and on SOME issues, I think "democracy" works well.

This is the article that got my posting privileges revoked:
http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2013/05/12/18212165-dr-stan-...

The representatives were there to protect the republic

from democracy.

Now let me ask you. Given as the majority of Americans are too stupid to make informed decision, given as they can change their minds faster than Mitt Romney based on the shallowest of emotions, you really want these people making instant policy decisions?

Get your preps together! Learn historic food storage and preservation methods and the science that makes them work now, start saving money and the future

Yes, and they are doing a

Yes, and they are doing a mighty fine job now, aren't they?

I think their idea still stomps the ass out of your idea.

So being that we have a shitty system now, you want to help it out by giving it the same thing. Why, because it's working great for us now?

lol

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Get off your ass and put pen to paper.

We all know electronic voting is susceptible to fraud. You can't hack a paper ballot. And exit polls.

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

The CURRENT system of electronic voting is susceptible

but it doesn't have to be that way. It is very easy to design a system with full transparency and accountability at every level.

And hacking a paper ballot isn't really the issue, now is it? The issue is counting them which is fraught with many more problems than electronic voting ever could be.

So why not entertain the idea at least enough to understand how it might work and what all the pros and cons might be?

If those

WH petitions are a reflection of what kind of policies we'd have...no thank you.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James