The Constitution of The United States of America is really an evil document.
What most people consider really good about the constitution is really the Bill of Rights.
The Constitution gives the powers of a king to the president.
It allows congress to make any law, including ones that are against the Constitution, without any recourse.
And even worse, you are not really a part of the contract that is the Constitution. You are not a signer nor their posterity. You cannot use this document as defense in court.
So, how would we go about fixing the constitution?
In specific, how would you go about fixing the constitution so that voting mattered?
First, one person, one vote is probably the worst thing in most cases.
If we were discussing actual laws, like "Thou Shalt Not Kill", then each person's opinion matters fairly equally.
But what if we are voting on welfare? There is a group of people that are paying for it, and a group of people who are going to get money out of it, and a group of people who are going to get a job out of it. Who should have a vote in this case?
On a bill that says all the farmers in the rural area need to give all the food they grow to the people in the urban area because the city folk need it more. Who should get a vote on this? The city folk outnumber the country folk, but do the city folk deserve a vote at all?
Also, based on the type of bill, we should have better voting standards.
For a law that affects everyone, the bill should be passed by 90%.
If 90%+ of the people are not for the law, then it isn't really a law.
Most of the people need to want to follow the law already.
Of course this would mean very few laws are passed. But that is ok with me.
One dollar one vote:
When you fill out your 1040, you should also include a page of which government entities get what percentage of your taxes. If an entity does not get a minimum amount of taxes to reliably do its stated job, it should be terminated immediately. The entire bureau gone.
A veto vote.
After a bill has been passed, then, in the next voting cycle, the populous can vote it out.
None of this, have to wait years to vote for a new representative, who has no real intention or ability to bring up an old bill. It should be gotten rid of by the people who have found that it sucked.
A "NO" vote
When faced with a list of candidates, a voter should be able to vote "NO". Meaning, that none of the candidates are good enough, and none of them should be put into the position. This may mean that many times a new pool of candidates needs to be formed and a new vote set up.
Separation of Political Party and the State.
The state should not be running the political party primaries voting. Those political parties need to work out their own votes in their own systems. Keep track of their members, and verify who they are and whom they vote for. We should not have this thing where the state apparatus is used to restrict who gets to vote. Also deciding, by bureaucracy, which political parties are viable.
But even further, it should be a round robbin sort of elimination.
Or, some kind of voting in multiple stages.
Where you can change your vote as you see that certain candidates aren't going to make it at all.
(such as changing your vote from Perot to Bush or Pete to Trump)
You can manipulate a vote by choosing which order of pairings the vote happens in. This needs to be eliminated.
With online voting, we can have a lot faster turn around times.
Real time statistics.
And actual verifiable results.
Which opens up multiple rounds of voting.
Or other voting patterns.
It would also be nice to have a method for those who voted for the politician to unvote for them, and kick them out of office real quick. Lose your support, lose your office. No waiting for 3 years later.
