CDub

I'm no lawyer, so perhaps I misunderstand the ni4d, but as I understand it, it goes beyond the state level making the people a 4th branch of the federal government.

The congress is not replaced, but instead the people are allowed to pass and repeal national laws.

If it ever passes, I intend to propose a law such that congressional pay is tied directly to the median wage of the constituency they represent, or at minimum, that congressional payraises are voted on by the people, rather than the congress.

It's kinda fun to imagine what you could do if you were allowed to become your own representative.

I voted for the ni4d, and my voter ID was so low, I imagine they have a long way to go to reach 50% of voters in the most recent Presidential election.

I hope folks take the time to check it out and vote. One cool thing, you can go back and change your vote at any time before the election is closed. They've been at this since 1992, so you get a lot of time to think it through.

I followed the link you sent me (and posted here) and it's indeed an interesting site.

What CDub's site is proposing is to have national referenda in national elections. These are known at the state level as "Propositions" or "Initiatives."

Living in California as I do, we have such propositions as part of every election. There's usually half a dozen of them on any given ballot. The most famous of these is probably Proposition 13.

It's an example of "direct" or "pure" democracy: the people vote on a law, instead of voting for someone else to vote on laws for them. This can be useful when the state legislature refuses to act on contentious issues.

CDub, I liked the site so much that I have now included it on my "Blogroll" or list of links (at the bottom of the left sidebar of any page on this site). I encourage others to check it out as well.

I also encourage others to send me similar links. My "Blogroll" needs some work... it's on my "to do" list, and I apologize for not addressing it sooner.

Anyway, CDub, thanks for the post and thanks for the link. I don't know what their chances are for actually succeeding in their efforts, but that's never stopped me from supporting an idea before, so I say more power to them!

-CW

I think I may have been unclear when I sent you the link since I suggested that it was a way to get "we, the people" back into the democratic process and perhaps that suggested an "all votes are equal" type of initiative. I support the notion making all votes count the same, but the National Initiative for Democracy (ni4d) is an entirely different beast.

The ni4d is off topic for this post, but since I broached the subject, and you sent me here to read up, please bear with me.

The ni4d amounts to ammending the constitution to create a 4th branch of government composed of registered voters. Essentially co-equal to the legislature, the people could directly enact laws and ammend existing laws without interference from lobbyists. The result being an additional set of "checks and balances" composed of the people, those that this government is supposed to be of, by and for.

I can't possibly do the subject justice, so I encourage you to follow the link and tell us what you see. Bring a lawyer though, since the full text of the amendment and a supporting law are there to peruse, and it's not necessarily an easy read.

Love the site, putting it in my rotation.

CDub

Well, now that you have profiled the GOP "wild card" of Michael Bloomberg, should we expect an equally compelling and insightful profile of the Democratic Party "wild card" of Al Gore?? :D

I promise to be gentle.. hehehehehe :D

Michale.....

This article has been corrected.

270 is the "magic number" of electoral votes to win, not 290 as I originally stated. Click on the Huffington Post link at the bottom of the article, and read the comments to see me get taken to task for this error (and my lame excuse).

DemocracyAdvocate -

I have edited your post. ONLY TWO THINGS were changed - I made the http://www.nationalpopularvote.com into a link to that URL, and I corrected the spelling of the word "post" in the first sentence because I just couldn't help myself! Anyway, not one other word was edited IN ANY WAY.

To Everyone -

DemocracyAdvocate's post has a lot of links in it. Normal policy is anything with links gets flagged for approval instead of posting automatically. This is to fight "comment spam." But each and every one of DA's links is worth reading, which is why I allowed it.

I encourage everyone to check out the "Fair Vote" concept, and wish them luck and success in their mission. They are trying to do an "end run" around having to get a Constitutional Amendment to change the electoral college system, and are having a lot of success so far.

I have mostly been advocating for a change in our primary system, as I think it is ripe for reform as well (2008 is going to be one big "test case" for a "national primary"). If you haven't read what I have to say about it, click the "Home" link at the top of this page, and then use the search button to search for "Carter" to see all my articles on the primaries (ignore the one about Oz).

dapper -

Today's post will be about Edwards. Look for it in a few hours.

Thanks to all for commenting.

-CW

Wow, that was quite a post. Sure gives one much to ponder about. Thank you SOoooooo much for doing all that research and then such a fine analysis. Kinda exciting, really.

Of course I'm still of the mind to go into attack mode if Bloomberg should decide to run. Agape.

John Edwards 08

John Edwards "Gets it"

Note that Bloomberg actually could win under the electoral college as easily as he could be win by plurality. Look at our recent "innovative analysis" posting about this issue -- if Perot had won 35% of the national vote in 1992, he almost certainly would have won. It's at:
http://fairvote.org/?page=27&pressmode=showspecific&showarticle=156

You also might enjoy my memo on the unlikely prospects of a tie in the electoral college, but also how confusing it is if it might happen -- including the fact that South Dakota's Democratic Congresswoman Herseth has publicly pledged to vote the way her state voted (e.g, Republican). See:
http://www.fairvote.org/?page=1978&mode=showallbig&offset=3

Also, a factor in all this is our failed voting system. See http://www.fairvote.org/irv and http://www.instantrunoff.com