Another Piece of the Broken Government Puzzle

Does my vote for the president actually count?

J.P. McJefferson, http://jpmcjefferson.blogspot.com/

There are many confusing explanations in response to this question, but it’s a simple matter of state votes vs. public or popular votes. When you vote for President, you are actually voting to determine how your state will vote for President — you are not voting directly for the President.

Frankly, I could care less, how my state votes for the President, yet it is one of the primary reasons for the electoral college process. It’s all about big states vs. little states. The Founders had a fear that under the popular vote, the choice of President would always be decided by the largest, most populous States with little regard for the smaller ones. When they wrote the constitution, this was a big deal with the limitations of travel and communication. Obviously, a candidate could campaign in a few large states, save money, time and likely get elected.

In today’s world, the process is totally meaningless and irrelevant and yet we continue to use the same antiquated process over 200 years after it was instituted. It has now led to two unprecedented Presidential elections in the last 16 years where the states elected George Bush and Donald Trump, but the public elected Al Gore and Hillary Clinton by over 500,000 and 2.23 million votes, respectively.

Another reason for the electoral college process was to prevent a charismatic tyrant from fooling the public and attracting a majority of the popular vote. The Founders reasoned that the electoral college process would allow a more knowledgeable group of savy electors to override a misinformed public. As you might expect, there are various opinions on whether that “check and balance” actually works.

124 Views · View Upvotes

Upvoters3

Comment

Share

View 14 Other Answers to this Question

Sweeping Gridlock Under The Rug

As the nation prepares for the most watched television debate ever between Clinton and Trump, the most important governance crisis this country faces is almost never discussed – Congressional gridlock.

Oh yeah, you will hear candidates expounding on how they’re going to work with Congress to get things done. They’re going to “reach across the aisle” and work with the other side – blah, blah, blah – it’s all empty rhetoric.

The issue of Congressional gridlock is front and center, the most important underlying issue this country faces. It is destroying the country’s ability to govern itself, make important decisions and advance the principles of democracy that made this country great and the shinning star on the world stage.

Yet, despite its importance, the basic issue and serious proposals for reform rarely get the appropriate public exposure, debate and attention it deserves. It demands Presidential leadership and should be at the top of the agenda for the Presidential debate.

The publics’ frustration with government’s dysfunction is highlighted consistently with nearly two-thirds in recent years, silently screaming the country is on the wrong track. But, they are also focusing their frustration like a laser beam on Congress – not the President and specifically not President Obama.

The latest and recent Presidential approval ratings show President Obama at between 50-54 percent. Congressional approval, on the other hand is between 9-12 percent – H-E-L-L-O! – screaming dissatisfaction with the way Congress is addressing its Constitutional responsibilities. (RealClearPolitics latest and recent polling)

In tonight’s Presidential debate, wouldn’t you like to hear each candidate provide some specifics (underline specifics) on how they will address the most important, underlying issue in U.S. politics today? GO LESTER HOLT!

FOLLOW UP: Well, the subject of good government, broken government, Congressional gridlock, etc. did not come up in Monday night’s debate watched by over 80 million viewers (transcript). But, it sure would have been interesting to hear the responses. Maybe next time. How about this question for example:

MODERATOR: This question is for both of you. As you know, the overall Congressional approval rating hovers at around 10%, yet President Obama’s approval rating is over 50%. How do you explain this phenomenon? And, as President, how would you use the bully pulpit to educate the American public about Congressional gridlock and what do you plan to do or propose to make Congress more functional?

An Inside Look At The Politics of Congressional Gridlock

If you’re looking for an excellent example and an inside look at how political gridlock works to stifle action on critical issues, you need to read this well written account by Lindsay Wise with McClatchy news service:

The day Zika deal died:

A cautionary tale of congressional gridlock

This is why only 14% of registered voters approve of the job Congress is doing; 78% disapprove; and 9% are unsure. [Monmouth U. RV poll 8/4/16.] 

This is the reason "Right Track - Wrong Track" polling results continually indicate widespread belief that the country is on the wrong track, in spite of the fact that President Obama’s approval ratings continue to rank over 50% -- which is always a milestone for any President.

Congressional reformers should look closely at this article and dissect it at each junction in the process to develop proposals for change. A major focus should be on the ability of legislators to add unrelated amendments and riders to legislation designed to address a specific issues. [See my post: Unrelated Amendments & Riders – Tricks of the Political Trade]

Unfortunately, these political shenanigans continue each day Congress is in session and are designed to frustrate constructive action on major issues. They further divide and polarize the legislature and the general public as the “blame game” plays out with 24/7 media coverage & news bites, tweets & blog posts, editorials & op-eds and general Internet chatter.

The source of overall public discontent with “government” seems clear – the solutions are not. Interesting, the current Presidential campaigns seem to be missing an important opportunity to address strategies and specific solutions to address the current state of governmental dysfunction.

Poll: Voters Blame Both Parties for Congressional Gridlock

------------------------------- REPRINT --------------------------------

August 31, 2016. by STEPHANIE PSYLLOS, JOHN LAPINSKI and STEPHANIE PSYLLOS

While Democrats and Republicans running for Congress have blamed the opposing party for the gridlock in Washington, a majority of voters (55 percent) said both Democrats and Republicans in Congress are equally to blame for the stalemate, according to the latest NBC News|SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking Poll.

However, nearly double the number of voters said Republicans in Congress are more to blame (30 percent) than Democrats (14 percent). . . (click to continue). Results have an error estimate of plus or minus 1.0 percentage points. For full results and methodology, click here

------------------------------- END REPRINT --------------------------------

See my post: RIGHT TRACK - WRONG TRACK: It's All About Gridlock

Congressional Gridlock Now A Matter of Life and Death. . .

[Reprinted from James Cargas for U.S. Congress (TX- 7th)]

HOUSTON (Aug. 29, 2016) – House Republicans are playing with our lives when they play political games and refuse to fund Zika virus treatment and research.

Last year, we learned the Zika virus was on its way to America. In February, the President asked Congress for $1.9 billion in emergency funding for mosquito control, treatment, and development of a vaccine. House Republicans slashed that request by almost 50%, to $1.1 billion, and then, in August, left for a month-long vacation without passing the requested legislation or approving any funds for this critical effort. Not a penny!

An important aspect of this request is that, not only are Houston and Texas as a whole going to be hard-hit by Zika, but America’s leading Zika vaccine research is happening right here in our Texas Medical Center. Medically and financially, Houston has an enormous stake in this Congressional action (and inaction).

While the political blame game plays out in the papers and on TV, there are over 90 confirmed Zika cases in Texas, 30 in Harris County, and 2 dead babies—one here in Harris County.

Why can’t Congress pass Zika research funding?

The fact is that House Republicans, including John Culberson, control Congress and will not allow a vote on a “clean” Zika bill, without any adding unrelated provisions addressing displays of the confederate flag, amendments to the Clean Water Act, or unpopular restrictions on Planned Parenthood.

It is crystal clear which party puts political games ahead of our health and our babies’ health.

I am running for Congress because I am tired of our do-nothing Congress.

I am tired of watching the Republican House leadership play political games while mothers and their babies suffer and die from this terrible disease.

When political gridlock in faraway Washington, DC, threatens the lives of Houstonians right here and now, it’s no laughing matter and it’s not a game. It’s a matter of our elected officials not being responsible to the people who elected them. And, now, it’s also a matter of life and death.

--------------- END OF REPRINT ----------------

AND SO IT GOES. . . (See my post: Unrelated Amendments & Riders -- Tricks of the Political Trade)

RIGHT TRACK - WRONG TRACK: It's All About Gridlock

I heard a respected political pundit the other day expressing confusion over the fact that the latest "Right Trak - Wrong Track" poll indicating widespread belief that the country was on the wrong track, in spite of the indications that the President's approval ratings continue to rank over 50% -- which is always a milestone for any President.

"Uhmmm," I said to myself, "it make perfect sense to me. I wonder why it's not obvious to him (the pundit)."

I decided to do a little research and found a recent July 17, 2016, article reporting on this perceived conundrum. According to the report on the lates Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. . . 

"Some 73% in the new survey say things have gone off-course, with only 18% saying the nation is headed in the right direction. . . For the third straight month, 51% of voters say they approve of President Barack Obama’s job performance, his highest marks sincetaking the oath of office for a second time, in early 2013."

"Together, the two indicators mark a rare occurrence: Usually presidents and their party take the blame when Americans are unhappy. But while the nation is unified in dissatisfaction, many don’t see the party in power as its cause." July17, 2016 WSJ

The latest Bloomberg Politics Poll conducted by Selzer & Company, Aug. 5-8, 2016, indicates 68% wrong trak; 25% right direction; 7% unsure. During the first half of August, President Obama's approval rating has averaged 53.5% according to 4 separate polls.

I'm a political wonk so I watch and read a lot about the current Presidential campaign. I hear Donald Trump and his Republican surrogates constantly emphasizing the fact that nearly three-fourths of American's think the contry is on the wrong track. Thus, they imply -- it is obvious the people want a change in leadership at the top. When they're promoting their party or Presidential nominee, they rarely point out President Obama's high approval ratings. 

But wait a minute, why are people so dissatisfied with the direction of the country if the President's approval ratings are so high? Well, you have to look at couple of other poll numbers.

How about this one -- 14% approve of the job Congress is doing; 78% disapprove; and 9% are unsure. Monmouth U. RV poll 8/4/16. The highest figure this year for Congressional approval was 19%. Further, Democrats in Congress garnered a modest 37% approval while Republicans saw only a 20% approval.

It seems clear to me that people are not upset with the direction of the country because of President Obama – why would his approval rating be over 50%?. It doesn't even seem to be a highly partisan dissatisfaction – 37% approval is only moderately better than 20%, and not really anything to be terribly proud of. What’s so revealing is the combined Democrat-Republican rating of 14%.

You should be hearing bells and whistles about now. It’s not the leadership at the top that has the country so upset – it’s because of the complete and utter inaction and dysfunction in the U.S. Congress – it’s called Congressional gridlock and it is the root of the publics’ belief that the country is headed in the wrong direction (and that's what this blog is all about).

Timely related article in Real Clear Politics: "Will Right-Track/Wrong-Direction Numbers Help Trump?", By David Byler, August 18, 2016. Also, check out the revealing comments.

V.P. Biden Could Lead Gridlock Reform

An Open Letter To Vice President Biden

Mr. Vice President, now is the time for you to 

exercise one of your important duties.

vice.president@whitehouse.gov

Dear Mr. Vice President,

The Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, a nonpartisan law and policy institute that seeks to improve our systems of democracy and justice, has indicated that “Although often overlooked, one of the duties of the vice president is to act as president of the Senate, including issuing advisory opinions about internal Senate procedure.”¹

I am writing to you to remind that you are in a very unique position at a critical point in our nation’s history to issue an historic Advisory Opinion on internal Senate procedures that could be a highlight of your legacy and a manifesto to challenge and guide the future operations of the United States Senate.

First of all, as President of the U.S. Senate you are in the foremost position to issue such a manifesto. Secondly, your 36 year career as an active U.S. Senator, combined with nearly 8 years as Vice President and Senate President, has given you a perspective unmatched by any individual. Thirdly, your apparent retirement from elected office, gives you a credibility and neutrality which is necessary to speak on a controversial issue that demands bipartisanship, yet defies resolution because of its powerful political scope that benefits both major political parties. Finally, as the Obama Administration draws to a close and a new Presidency has yet to be decided, and a new Congressional session looms, the timing could not be better to set the stage for a new era Senatorial reform.

As you and all Washington, DC insiders know well, certain Senate procedures and rules are a major contributor to governmental gridlock and dysfunction. The excessive increase in the so-called “silent filibuster”; the arcane procedure known as a Senatorial “hold”; and the ability of Senate Leadership and Committee Chairs to ignore Constitutionally-mandated functions (advise and consent) because there are no specified procedural time limits (e.g. Supreme Court appointment), are a few examples of rules and procedures that demand changes.

Some will argue that such changes require a two-thirds vote of the Senate, but that argument has been dispelled by both Republicans and Democrats.

Again, citing the Brennan Center, “The Constitution nowhere requires a two-thirds vote for changing Senate rules and does not even mention filibusters. The Constitution states that ‘each house may determine the rules of its proceedings,’ and the document requires a two-thirds vote only for impeachments, expelling a member, ratifying treaties, overriding presidential vetoes, and proposing constitutional amendments. There is simply no reason to believe that the framers of the Constitution thought a two-thirds vote could be required for the Senate (or the House) to change its rules. The straightforward inference is that, as a constitutional matter, only a simple majority is required.”²

Without going into the details of these extreme extra-parliamentary practices that both parties have self-imposed on House & Senate procedures, it is these very practices that have led, in large part, to the current dysfunctional government and the increasing public unrest.

It is my opinion that if you dig deep into the search for solutions you can find it in the simple concept of "majority rule." For the last several decades inside political manipulation by both parties has undermined this basic concept, and as a result given rise to a devilish concept of "minority rule." This nightmarish concept defies compromise and feeds on government stagnation, obstruction and inaction on increasingly perplexing problems and issues that demand action -- that's why the public is mad – that’s why they have lost their trust and respect for government.

Not only do these practices grind decision making to a standstill, but they allow for increased leverage for lobbyists and moneyed influences. These practices are the "demons of democracy" and have led to the public’s perception that Congress is basically useless as a governing body – e.g. approval ratings less than 10%.

As Thomas Jefferson pointed out way back in 1809, "Where the law of the majority ceases to be acknowledged, there government ends, the law of the strongest takes its place, and life and property are his who can take them." He also said, "All... being equally free, no one has a right to say what shall be law for the others. Our way is to put these questions to the vote, and to consider that as law for which the majority votes."³

The “demons of democracy” have so distorted the democratic process envisioned by the Founders and the Constitution, as to make it unrecognizable. No elected President (Democrat, Republican or Independent) can achieve their stated or envisioned goals for the country because of these constraints. The result is that the majority public and winning candidate are denied any opportunity to see their vision actually implemented.

We must have trust in the majority rule system as it may not always deliver the results that we, as an individual, envision; however, if decisions are really bad, the majority corrects itself by changing direction. The founders and our Constitution were based on the concept of majority rule and we have now drifted away from that cornerstone.

Mr. Vice President, your leadership on this vital issue at this critical time can help turn the tide of what is becoming a dangerous decline in the public’s belief in our democratic form of government and our political leaders from both major parties.

I refer you to my blog – J.P. McJefferson: Exposing the Underpinnings of a Broken Government – for postings, commentary, tools, resources and court cases relating to broken government.

Please use your position, experience and authority to address these critical issues in an Advisory Opinion on internal Senate procedures.

¹ The Filibuster Myth, Frederick A. O. (“Fritz”) Schwarz, Jr., January 15, 2013. Brennan Center

²The Filibuster Myth, Frederick A. O. (“Fritz”) Schwarz, Jr., January 15, 2013. Brennan Center

³ Thomas Jefferson to Annapolis Citizens, 1809. ME 16:337 & Thomas Jefferson: Address to the Cherokee Nation, 1809. ME 16:456

Comment: "How American Politics Went Insane"

(comment in response to Jonathan Rauch's article published in The Atlantic, July/August, 2016 issue -- "How American Politics Went Insane")

This is an excellent article that focuses on many of the underlying reasons that have led to the sad state of our current dysfunctional government and the increasing public unrest. It is my opinion that if you dig deep into the search for solutions you can find it in the simple concept of "majority rule." For the last several decades inside political manipulation by both parties has undermined this basic concept, and as a result given rise to a devilish concept of "minority rule." This nightmarish concept defies compromise and feeds on government stagnation, obstruction and inaction on increasingly perplexing problems and issues that demand action -- that's why the public is mad.

 

The deep-rooted underpinnings of this increased dysfunction are Congressional rules and procedures all designed to frustrate the concept of majority rule -- abuses of the filibuster process in the Senate (silent filibuster & extensive use); senatorial holds; the “Hastert rule” in the House; riders & unrelated amendments, etc. Not only do they grind decision making to a standstill, but they allow for increased leverage for lobbyists and moneyed influences.

 

These are the "demons of democracy" that, as this article indicates have led to, "the general public’s reflexive, unreasoning hostility to politicians and the process of politics. Neurotic hatred of the political class. . ." As Thomas Jefferson pointed out way back in 1809, "Where the law of the majority ceases to be acknowledged, there government ends, the law of the strongest takes its place, and life and property are his who can take them."

 

But, solutions are at hand. I agree with the article which indicates, "Restoring the earmarks that help grease legislative success requires nothing more than a change in congressional rules. . ." This is true and every Washington politician and political insider knows it. Yet reforms to correct the process are few and far between because both parties use the "demons" to their advantage to manipulate political outcomes.

 

The public, the media, political reformers and the few remaining "statesmen" in Congress must focus their efforts like a laser beam on the "demons" and press for changes to restore majority rule. As I point out in one of my blog posts, you have to trust the majority rule system as it may not always deliver the results that you want -- if decisions are really bad, the majority corrects itself by changing direction -- if you can't live with majority rule then you should probably seek another alternative, somewhere else.

J.P. McJefferson, "Exposing the Underpinnings of a Broken Government."

Unrelated Amendments & Riders – Tricks of the Political Trade

(provided as a comment on H.R.2578 on the excellent website 4US.com)

H.R.2578 is a good example of legislative and political manipulation designed to confuse the public and hide important issue votes -- the practice of adding unrelated amendments, indirectly related and riders to bills under consideration. It is a ploy designed to deceive the public, sneak through legislation and make it difficult to hold legislators accountable. You can see here on the 4US.com website, the important significance of some of the amendments to this bill that were considered and voted on are not revealed and you cannot tell how your Members voted. Unrelated amendments are a significant contributor to Congressional gridlock and broken government and should be eliminated.

The primary purpose of this bill was to provide appropriations to the Department of Commerce, the Department of Justice (DOJ), science agencies, and several related agencies. Yet four, highly controversial amendments relating to gun regulations were offered and defeated in separate and very close votes.

See: Senate rejects all gun bills - Democrats and Republicans took turns defeating dueling proposals on background checks and efforts to prevent terrorists from buying firearms. June 20, 2016

See also: all details for H.R.2578 - Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016, including amendments and links to roll call votes on the Congress.gov website.

How should Congress react to the Orlando shooting?

(Response to a question posted on the Quora website)

In a better world, Congress should react to the Orlando shooting by doing something close to the wishes of the majority American public and in their best interest in terms of their public safety and security. Unfortunately, the Congressional action we have seen in reaction to Orlando, Sandy Hook and countless others, is the most appalling example of gridlock and a broken government – Congress did nothing; again, and again, and again.

According to a CNN/ORC Poll. June 16-19, 2016. N=1,001 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.

• 55% favor stricter gun control laws
• 54% favor an outright ban on “assault-type guns
• 54% favor a ban on high-capacity or extended ammunition clips
• 92% favor expanded background checks
• 87 % favor preventing certain people, such as convicted felons or people with mental health problems, from owning guns
• 85% favor preventing people who are on the U.S. government's Terrorist Watchlist or no-fly list from owning guns

So, the American public clearly wants expanded controls and regulations of guns and people who buy them; however, the same poll also shows us that 90% of the public opposes preventing all Americans from owning guns. So, the public does not want the government to “take our guns away”, and based on public opinion, it seems to be only a fantasy conspiracy theory that such an action would ever be undertaken.

Despite the overwhelming public will; despite an old fashion standing Senate filibuster; despite an unprecedented 26-hour sit-in by House Democrats – Congress refused to do anything with respect to the Orlando shooting. If Congress didn’t act following the slaughter of twenty, 6 and 7 year olds at Sandy Hook; should we be surprised that they didn’t react to a massacre of 49 innocent souls in an Orlando nightclub?

While it may be easy to blame the National Rifle Association (NRA) and their money and lobbyists, we need to look deeper at what allows Congress to blatantly disregard public opinion and give so much power to a minority interest. It’s not just the NRA and it’s not just the gun issue. It’s about a host of issues and the inability of Congress to address difficult issues and take action.

It’s the result of a complex labyrinth of House and Senate rules (formal and informal) and procedures that are designed to frustrate the Founding Father’s cornerstone of democracy – “majority rule.” Thomas Jefferson, a staunch advocate of majority rule said: "Where the law of the majority ceases to be acknowledged, there government ends, the law of the strongest takes its place, and life and property are his who can take them." --Thomas Jefferson to Annapolis Citizens, 1809. ME 16:337

A scary thought for sure; and when it’s boiled down, the lack of majority rule is the underlying reason for most of the public unrest that is characterized as broken, dysfunctional government and gridlock. When you prevent majority rule you allow a minority to control decisions, as Alexander Hamilton pointed out, “To give a minority a negative upon the majority (which is always the case where more than a majority is requisite to a decision). . .” Federalist Paper #22.

Yes, we have a very divided electorate which seems to have grown more divided in recent years. But, the move to prevent majority rule has also made it more difficult to craft bipartisan solutions.

In the House of Representatives a measure cannot even be brought to the Floor unless a majority of the majority party (Republicans) agrees – the so-called “Hastart Rule”. Thus, based on the current numbers of Republican and Democrats in the House, all major issues are controlled by 29% of the members.

In the Senate, the old, standing filibuster has evolved into the new “silent” filibuster, where a Member simply says he will filibuster and action which then automatically requires a supermajority of 60 to bring an action to a vote. And, if that’s not enough, there is now an overused procedure called a “Senatorial hold” which allows any individual Senator to bring any action to a halt by placing a “hold” on it until certain demands are met.

These are just some of the procedural “tricks” that are used to prevent majority rule and they are used by both Democrats and Republicans. The sad part is that all Senators and Representatives know these procedures are resulting in the political gridlock that the public resents, but they refuse to eliminate them. Both parties use them to prevent majority rule, avoid responsibility, and create the gridlock which they can use as an excuse for their inaction.

The media, responsible government reform organizations, and the few ethical Members of the House and Senate (we used to call them “statesmen”) need to focus more attention on these, modern-day “demons of democracy” and the ease by which they could be eliminated if the right public pressure were applied.

Reasonable gun control regulations could have been implemented years ago, and many other important issues could have been addressed if these destructive mechanisms were scrubbed or seriously revised. And, who knows how many lives might have been saved.

Some Reddit Discussions On Filibuster & Broken Government

Let's discuss filibuster reform. What would changes in procedure look like? from PoliticalDiscussion

Landmark Senate Vote Limits Filibusters from politics

Why hasn't the Senate reformed the filibuster system? from NeutralPolitics

The Senate and the filibuster, is there a way to preserve minority rights and a functional legislative body in todays political environment? from NeutralPolitics

Senate reformers are talking about new filibuster rules that'd require minority senators to keep talking during the entire length of their filibuster - No more nonsense about just announcing a filibuster & then heading out for drinks. from politics

What Is Broken Government & What Do We Really Want?

Donald Trump & Bernie Sanders have both done a good thing in publicizing what we already knew -- "The system is rigged." It's good that the criticism has come from both sides of the political aisle. President Obama should do more to explain the rigged system to the American public in his remaining days while he is not encumbered and tainted by the need to be reelected. The Trump solution is just elect him and everything will be okay. Bernie's solution is to elect him and there will be a massive public revolution that will implement all of his ideas. Unfortunately, both are dubious, shallow and naive at best.

The point is, it doesn't matter who is elected because the system is rigged. The President elected in 2016, will not be able to achieve their vision for the country or the vision of their many followers. The result will be a lot of frustration and disappointment and more cries of broken government. Carried to the extreme, over time, the electorate will simply become so disenchanted and discouraged with the system that they will feel it is meaningless to vote and participate.

As I pointed out in my very first post – every U.S. Representative & Senator, as well as state and local government officials, lobbyist and political insiders know the reason that there is gridlock in Washington, DC and elsewhere -- they also know how to fix it -- but they won't.

So, we all agree, the systems is broken and rigged

We have to ask the question -- What's really "broken"? You might say it's the crooked politicians. Too much money in politics. Big business and big banks always get their way. Too many lobbyist and special interest, voting rights, etc. Then, you can get down to the more structural problems like I discuss all the time -- gerrymandering, campaign financing, misuse of the filibuster, Senatorial "holds", the “Hastert rule”, unrelated "riders", etc.

But, underlying it all is a simple, basic concept -- majority rule. And all of the items mentioned above are basically designed to prevent or frustrate the concept of majority rule.

So, what's the goal? What's the end game to fixing a broken, rigged government? It's to make the politicians listen and do what the majority wants -- Right? Well, before we go too far we should have a little discussion about -- "Being careful what you wish for."

We have to do a little self examination here. You see, we already have a system that is "rigged" -- where majority doesn't rule. So, what we're seeking is a "majority rule" system. Okay, so what if the majority doesn't agree with you personally? Are you ready to suck it up and live with the "majority rule"?

You see, that's the hard part. . . at any given point in time. . . sometimes, the majority opinion won't necessarily agree with yours. So what are you going to do? Now what's wrong with the system? You want a system that always delivers the result you want? Sorry, that's not the way it works.

So, here's the caveat -- over time, the majority system corrects itself. At least it corrects itself to the majority at that time. Sometimes the majority gets fooled or needs to experience a certain policy or ideology. Then, if the vision does not turn into reality, the majority corrects itself by changing direction. You have to trust the majority system. And, if you can't live with majority rule then you should probably seek another alternative, somewhere else.

Okay, now we know what we want -- a majority rule system; but, wait a minute. A majority of what? A majority of the whole population? -- families? registered voters? persons over 18? All the people, or just those that care? It's worth thinking about, but for discussion sake, I'm going to assume that we are talking about a majority of people over 18 that are concerned or care enough to participate.

It all sounds a little overwhelming. So what's the next step in solving the problem -- getting to a majority rule system. We need a plan. We need some tools. We need solutions.

In a future post I'll make some suggestions on how we get from here to there.

P.S. The concept of majority rule has been discussed and debated forever. A few quotes from Thomas Jefferson are instructive:

"Where the law of the majority ceases to be acknowledged, there government ends, the law of the strongest takes its place, and life and property are his who can take them." --Thomas Jefferson to Annapolis Citizens, 1809. ME 16:337

"Every man, and every body of men on earth, possesses the right of self-government. They receive it with their being from the hand of nature. Individuals exercise it by their single will; collections of men by that of their majority; for the law of the majority is the natural law of every society of men." --Thomas Jefferson: Opinion on Residence Bill, 1790. ME 3:60

"I subscribe to the principle, that the will of the majority honestly expressed should give law." --Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793. ME 1:332

"All... being equally free, no one has a right to say what shall be law for the others. Our way is to put these questions to the vote, and to consider that as law for which the majority votes." --Thomas Jefferson: Address to the Cherokee Nation, 1809. ME 16:456

"We are sensible of the duty and expediency of submitting our opinions to the will of the majority, and can wait with patience till they get right if they happen to be at any time wrong." --Thomas Jefferson to John Breckenridge, 1800.

(click here for additional TJ quotes on majority rule)

And as Alexander Hamilton pointed out in the Federalist Paper #22:

“To give a minority a negative upon the majority (which is always the case where more than a majority is requisite to a decision), is, in its tendency, to subject the sense of the greater number to that of the lesser.” [i.e. “minority rule’]

Citizens Speak Out On Broken Government & Citizen Involvement

Some interesting & insightful commentary on a broken government and citizen participation by some mostly interesting & insightful citizens. Thanks to Quora, the website for answering questions. It's a lot to read but if your interested it will open your eyes. I have some answers to the question which I will post later.  

It's an interesting question to ask in light of Bernie Sanders' promises for a citizens' political revolution to achieve free college, universial free health care, $15 dollar minimum wage, breaking up the Big Banks, overturning Citizens' United, higher taxes on the rich; overturning TPP; criminal justice reform, etc.

What will it take, to get citizens involved, and stay involved in the Congressional process once the elections are over?

(click here)

President Obama Participates in a Conversation about the Supreme Court

For the first time in recent memory, Senate Republicans are flatly refusing to consider a Supreme Court nomination because they hope another party will win the next election. It isn't clear whether the Senate will ultimately deny the President's nominee a hearing or a vote for the entire year, so before positions harden, this is a good time for all of us to step back and think about the broader costs of this potential action to our judiciary.

The President talks about filibuster, gerrymandering, broken government and the Supreme Court nominee on April 7, 2016.