wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], anon_couscous_ff
> <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "jyouells2000" <jyouells@>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], anon_couscous_ff
> <no_reply@>
> > > wrote:
> > > The chances of getting an intelligent incentives policy for
> energy
> > > from the gov't is only slightly better than the chances of
> getting a
> > > group of pundits in FF after all the money is collected. The
> energy
> > > market will eventually do it, almost certainly.
> >
> > There are plenty of smart polcy analysts who know and promote such
> > policies. Its the undemocratic nature of the US governemnt (90% of
> > congressional races not competitive, 70% of states in presidential
> > elections not campaigned in significantly) and the
> high "corruption"
> > from current campaign financing that is the problem.
> >
>
>
> ...if people keep voting those same 90% into office with all the
> alleged "corruption", wouldn't you say that the people get the
> government that they deserve?
I think its quite a bent system. Your statement appears to be premised
on real choice. My point is that there is no real choice in a large
majority of races. From past discussions, I thought you favored the
types of reforms I am advocating (perhaps not):
Multiple parties
IRV -- Instant run-off voting
Abolish electoral college
End jerrymandering of house districts
Extensive campaign finance reform.
Four year house terms (to reduce campagin fund raising cycle)
etc.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
