Democracy without elections

Is such a thing possible? According to a theoretical approach to governance, it is.

Demarchy (people rule) or Klerostocracy, as Aristotle referred to it, is a theoretical political system that is designed to be run by randomly selected individuals. These individuals become the decision makers (legislators). They are selected randomly by sortition or lottery. Essentially, Demarchy achieves democratic representation without the need for elections. Under this system, the randomly selected individuals make-up a group referred to as a, ‘consensus conference.’ They deliberate to make decisions about public policies in the same manor juries work to reach verdicts in court cases.

The theoretical system was hypothesized as a remedy to the challenges and flaws associated with representative democracy, notably:

• Special interests
• Professional policymakers (politicians)
• Lobbyists
• An uninformed electorate

Basically, randomly selecting individuals acting as policymakers would make it easier for your average citizen to be aware of and actively participate in government. It would also make it harder for special interests to corrupt the process and control the government. Similarly, it would eliminate corruption among political leaders, corruption within political parties and possibly remove parties all together.

Another goal of Demarchy is to increase the efficiency of government. Under a standard representative democracy, a large portion of time and effort is wasted by politicians and bureaucracies working to gain political strength or offer out political support. Professional politicians spend a lot of time influencing others or being influenced by others, thus eating up even more time, energy, and money. When decision-makers are chosen at random, the time and effort spent to influence or be influenced is limited and isolated.

Under this system, changes would need to be made to governing bodies. For example, random selection to achieve consensus building policy decisions must focus on the legislature. An executive branch would likely be eliminated, perhaps replaced by a prime minister type figure selected from the ‘consensus conference’ by the ‘consensus conference’ itself each time it is convened. This would continue the system of sortition and maintain rule by the people, it would resemble a basic aspect of the current parliamentary system in Democracy.

One of the critiques I  offer however, – What happens when someone is randomly selected that has no desire, no care, or is incapable of serving? What than? Will they not be hindrance? Can one refuse to serve? – They are important thoughts to consider. Yet, putting them aside, the system is quite intriguing and would be a neat experiment in democratic governance. Though, the possibility of implementation is very unlikely. It is not like politicians to cede power away from themselves, thus it is not likely they will implement a system that makes their positions obsolete.

I found this concept intriguing, what do you think? Leave me your thoughts in the comments.

Is the Internet running out of IP addresses?

Law professor David Post claims that the original 4 billion unique Internet Protocol (IP) addresses are running out, and that the Internet will soon face a crisis unless a new version of the fundamental IP is enacted. “It will change the Net…as we know it in many profound ways,” he says of the new IP.

Downsizing Congress: Reduce its size, save our money

I received the following in an email. I thought it was a bit interesting, so I decided to throw it up on here. Give me your thoughts in comments.

The Proposal

When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to happen is they reduce their staff and workers. The remaining workers must find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job would be eliminated as well.

Wall street, and the media normally congratulate the CEO for making this type of “tough decision”, and his board of directors gives him a big bonus. Our government should not be immune from similar risks.

Therefore:

• Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218 members.
• Reduce Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State).
• Then, reduce their staff by 25%.

Accomplish this over the next 8 years (two steps/two elections) and of course this would require some redistricting.

Some Yearly Monetary Gains Include:

• $44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress. (267 members X $165,200 pay/member/ yr.)
• $97,175,000 for elimination of their staff. (estimate $1.3 Million in staff per each member of the House, and $3 Million in staff per each member of the Senate every year)
• $240,294 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.
• $7,500,000,000 reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year. (those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for total government pork earmarks are at $15 Billion/yr)

The remaining representatives would need to work smarter and improve efficiencies. It might even be in their best interests to work together for the good of our country! We may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more efficient resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep track of what your representative is doing.

Congress has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in 1911 when the current number of representatives was established. (telephone, computers, cell phones to name a few)

Note:
Congress did not hesitate to head home when it was a holiday, when the nation needed a real fix to the economic problems. Also, we have 3 senators that have not been doing their jobs for the past 18+ months (on the campaign trail) and still they all have been accepting full pay. These facts alone support a reduction in senators & congress.

Summary of opportunity:

• $44,108,400 reduction of congress members.
• $282,100, 000 for elimination of the reduced house member staff.
• $150,000,000 for elimination of reduced senate member staff.
• $59,675,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members.
• $37,500,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members.
• $7,500,000,000 reduction in pork added to bills by the reduction of congress members.
• $8,073,383,400 per year, estimated total savings. (that’s 8-BILLION just to start!)

Big business does these types of cuts all the time.

If Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits, tax payers could save a bundle.
Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.

Should DC receive a vote in congress?

A bill is before congress to give Washington DC their first vote in the House of Representatives, but it not go as far to declare the district a state.

The organization DC Vote argues:

The District of Columbia is the only jurisdiction in the United States where Americans fulfill all the responsibilities of citizenship but are denied equal rights. Americans living in Washington, DC, have no voting representation in Congress: no vote in the U.S. Senate and no vote in the U.S. House of Representatives. Here are some ways the injustice affects DC citizens:

• Military Service: DC’s daughters and sons fight and die for America defending freedom and democracy but have no vote when Congress votes to send them to war.

• Federal Taxes: People living in DC pay the second highest per capita federal income taxes in the country but have no vote on how the federal government spends their money.

• Voting Rights: Concerned American citizens living in our nation’s capital have no vote on important issues affecting nearly every aspect of their daily lives including: health care, Social Security, environmental protection, crime control, public safety and foreign policy.

• Education: Parents, teachers and community leaders have no vote when it comes to shaping national educational policies and academic standards.

• Economy and Business: DC’s business owners and workers are denied a vote in determining how Congress regulates business policy and the economy.

• Law: Local laws passed by locally elected officials are routinely overruled by members of Congress pursuing their own personal agendas without regard for the welfare of DC residents.

What are your thoughts, views, and opinions?

Social media kills! Hide in a cave, escape society!

Reading this blog may be harmful to your health.

Apparently, Oxford neuroscientist Susan Greenfield has concluded that social media sites are “infantilising the brain.” Her study claims that young people may develop short attention spans, a need for instant gratification, and possibly “lose their capacity to empathize with each other.”

Last I checked young people already had short attention spans and a need for instant gratification… doesn’t take a neuroscientist from Oxford to launch a study for an average Joe to understand that.

Though the assertion that young people may “lose their capacity to empathize with each other” is rather inventive. If you empathize with someone, you understand their situation, problems, and feelings, because you have been in a similar situation or can relate in some familiar manor. I fail to see how increased interaction, communication, and a heightened awareness of the activities of others will eliminate that ability – if anything, it will improve it.

But… there are always some crazy know it all wackos out there trying to mess with society. After all… some have even concluded that Twitter causes cancer.

History of the Internet

“History of the internet” is an animated documentary explaining the inventions from time-sharing to filesharing, from Arpanet to Internet.

DC Vote Bill Passes Committee

The Washington Post reports:

The Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee passed the legislation 11 to 1 at its first business meeting in the new Congress. The lone “no” vote was cast by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the 2008 Republican presidential nominee. It’s not clear when the legislation will reach the Senate floor for what is likely to be the key vote on the measure. [...] The bill would permanently expand the 435-member House by two seats. One would go to the overwhelmingly Democratic District, and the other to the state next in line to pick up a seat based on population. For the next few years, that state would be Utah, which leans Republican.

Social Media in Plain English

A McCain idea Obama should adopt

During the campaign season, Sen. John McCain stated that as president he would like to change a few ‘things’, one of these things was accountability; an area President Obama has been focusing on in the recent weeks since taking office.

On the campaign trail, McCain expressed an interest in learning from the Brits. In the UK, the Prime Minister goes before the House of Commons on a regular basis to face questions, address concerns, accusations and so forth. Senator McCain would like to see the same type of functions here, before the US House and Senate. McCain believed that the president should:

Go before both houses to take questions, and address criticism, much the same as the prime minister of Great Britain appears regularly before the House of Commons.

This would be an excellent and much needed change in communication and accountability between the branches of government. Three cheers to McCain for suggesting it!

McCain believed the president should be accountable for all actions and should have to answer for them directly, I agree. Such a change would be wonderful and is a non-partisan approach to government accountability and is a simple reform.

I’d like to call on Obama to follow this example and promise such a reform; for this is a needed change in the current system.

Fidel Casto lashes out at Obama, ‘Buy American’

Yes… you read the title correctly, the Cuban communist revolutionary is angry with Obama over the economic stimulus bill and its ‘buy American’ language. Castro argues that the measure is protectionist, he states:

To please the unions that supported them in the campaign, the U.S. House of Representatives, dominated by the Democrats, launched the extremely protectionist slogan ‘buy American products’, which throws aside a fundamental principle of the World Trade Organization: that all nations of the world, large and small, base their dreams of development on the exchange of goods and services, for which, however only the largest and those of natural wealth have the privilege to survive.

So…. what has America come to, when Fidel Castro is lecturing us on the principles of world trade and capitalism? Where do we go from here?

Who will replace Tom Daschle?

I felt like making a few predictions today. So, broken down into two categories – bipartisan and partisan -  here they are.

If Obama is feeling bipartisan:

• Mitt Romney - Romney continually boasts of his successful health-care record as Governor of Massachusetts. Though many republicans do like him, his Health Care record does displease many of them, since it is seen as too liberal. Perhaps he is exactly what Obama may be looking for.

• Bobby Jindal – Jindal is a young, vibrant rising Republican star. He headed the Louisiana State Health Department and served as the Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services for Planning and Evaluation at the Federal Level. He is a past congressman and is well liked by both moderate and conservative Republicans. Perhaps youth and experience are on Obama’s short list to fill the newly opened spot.

• Arnold Schwarzenegger – Hey… it could happen. He is a very moderate, some say liberal Republican. He is connected to the Kennedy family and boasts executive experience. Perhaps his middle of the row agenda, dedication to the environment and health will tickle Obama’s fancy.

If Obama is feeling partisan:

• Kathleen Sebelius – Sebelius, the governor of Kansas, was an early endorser of Obama back when it was not yet the ‘cool thing’ to do. She is considered a moderate, rising star in the Democratic Party who hails from a solid red state. She was speculated early on as a potential VP running mate or cabinet member and is a solid Washington outsider. She has been a continual advocate for health care reform, an issue she sees as both social and economically vital to America. It is likely that this early supporter is due for some appreciation.

• Jeanne Lambrew – Lambrew is a an academic and co-authored a health-care book with Tom Daschle. She brings to the table experience in writing health care legislation from the Clinton administration. Lambrew holds a Ph.D. in Health Policy and is currently the Deputy Director of the new White House Office of Health Care Reform. Perhaps Obama will simply shift the current staff up a bit.

• Christine Gregoire – Gregoire, the recently reelected governor of Washington State, was speculated to have been a pick for earlier other cabinet picks. Though she has no real health care past, per se (her only real resume credential for health is her service as a fraud investigator for the State Department of Social and Health Services). Though, she is still a contender based on her past interactions with Obama and her strong commitment to the Democratic party.