> the only thing that will get them to vote the right way is to hear from enough real constituents that the lawmakers feel like their reelection will be in jeap

> the only thing that will get them to vote the right way is to hear from enough real constituents that the lawmakers feel like their reelection will be in jeapordy if they do vote the wrong way. Like most real world systems this sounds incredibly inefficient to me. In germany there used to be (and maybe still is) the "Wahl-O-Mat" [1] ( an artificial word made out of two words: vote and automation ). The idea is to answer some questions and the Wahl-O-Mat tells you for which party you should vote. Let's extend this idea and make a thought experiment. Imagine the questions and the answers would be tended / adjusted over time (like a profile on a dating site). The rules how the voting suggestion is computed are straight forward ( a weighted sum or something ). If a new controverse question arises then people adjust their voting-profile according to their beliefs (or if it doesn't matter to them they don't). If the profiles are public then the outcome of the next elections can be predicted easily. Best next thing to direct democracy. [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahl-O-Mat https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahl-O-Mat Edit:grammar