At 07:19 AM 2/5/01 -0800, Matt wrote:
>Where would you find such a group of people, anyway?
You must have missed the previous discussion a few months ago.
Here it is from previous times:
>The candidacy of John McCain has brought campaign finance reform to the
>forefront of American Political Consciousness. American's look at the
>amount of money it takes to run for elected office in this country, and are
>rightly concerned about the time, energy, and above all *the committments*
>expended to raise this money.
>
>McCain, like almost all other observers, have proposed solving this problem
>by attacking the money- the source of money, how money is raised, how it is
>spent, etc. I think McCain has got it all wrong, however. Besides the
>fact that getting money out of politics is virtually impossible thanks to
>our 1st Amendment, I think attacking the money is akin to taking on the flu
>by finding a cure for the runny nose.
>
>The problem is that it is entirely reasonable that a candidate should need
>to expend lots of money to reach a nation of 270 million people. Shouldn't
>spending so much as $5 or $10 per voter be entirely resonable for a man or
>woman who would want our votes to become President?
>
>Why not, then, eliminate the need for one person to try and reach so many
>voters at once? It has been identified time and time again that the more
>local the election, to less important is the money to success. Rather,
>in local elections things like personal contacts, even personal meetings
>with candidates, matter a lot. Phone calls, town hall meetings,
>electioneering, etc. can all really turn a local race.
>
>So, how do we make all of our races local? Easy...
>
>1) Return election of Senators to State Legislatures. I think it would be
>an inherent beauty of a true federal system that one house of the
>legislature would represent the people and the other house would represent
>the States. Besides, people might actually learn who their State
>Legislators are under this system.
>
>2) Every four years, permit each Party to run two candidates in each
>Congressional District. Of the top two vote getters, one of them is
>randomly selected to be the Congressional Representative, the other is
>selected to be the Elector. Candidates in these races are prevented from
>endorsing anyone for President.
>
>As such, under this system, the Electoral College would actually have to
>meet for an extended period of time. Without a list of established
>candidates they would have to develop a list of nominees, perhaps conduct
>interviews of potential candidates, and form coalitions to produce an
>eventual President and Vice-President. It would be a truly wonderful
>exercise in Democracy.
>
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"The point of living in a Republic after all, is that we do not live by
majority rule. We live by laws and a variety of isntitutions designed
to check each other." -Andrew Sullivan 01/29/01
