3 ms·
Unless the donor simply required proof of vote that was established, likely illegally. I find it hard to imagine a voting process that would be controlled by co
by toolz 4y ago
Unless the donor simply required proof of vote that was established, likely illegally. I find it hard to imagine a voting process that would be controlled by congress, to have annoyingly secure methods to ensure the private nature of the vote.
Just look at our current voting machines. They're questionably secure and they're not even remotely as regulated/audited as even our gambling machines.
- jimkleiber 4y agoFor me the biggest switch is then I would care less about the individual performance and more about the team performance. Think about sports that have a stronger team component than individual. I think if the team fails, people often demand that lots of people leave the team—coach, owner, captain, etc. Sometimes to fully clean house. For more individual sports, people want that individual to leave. I think governance is more of a team sport than we realize and transparency efforts (congressional stats) make us focus more on the individual wins and less on the team wins. I care more if Congress passes an act I want than I do if my Senator votes in favor of what I want.
- giantg2 4y ago"For me the biggest switch is then I would care less about the individual performance and more about the team performance." So, even stronger partisan based voting? Don't care about the individual, only if their party wins...
- jimkleiber 4y agoNo, care about Congress as a team, not just the sub-teams of Republicans and Democrats. Caring about just the party is like only caring if the football team's offense or defense does well but not whether the team wins the game.
- giantg2 4y agoThat would be ideal, but I don't see that as being what was meant by the other commenter. It's certainly not how it works today. That football analogy is broken. The football team shares common goals. The parties in Congress very clearly have separate ideals/philosophies on specific issues. Even when they have a shared end goal (as the often do) the means to achieve it can be complete opposites.
- jimkleiber 4y agoI agree it doesn't work that way now, the strongest team identities are at the party level, overlooking that the US government was designed to balance different team identities: legislative vs executive vs judicial, federal (national) vs state, geographic territory vs population density. The football team may not share common goals. The offense may care about scoring lots of points because each player wants to get a higher salary in their upcoming contract negotiations. The owner may only care about offense because it gets more viewers and more lucrative TV contracts. I believe if we started rooting for Congress instead of rooting for one party (or one legislator), we might solve more collective problems. Personally, I don't care about the Republican or Democratic parties, I care if Congress solve problems. I want the American team to win not the political party, and I'm willing to guess that there are many more citizens who think like this than it appears.
- kelseyfrog 4y agoSurely there exists a voting system with k-anonymity/l-diversity which partially solves some of these competing desires, right?
- jimkleiber 4y agoI'm not sure if this is a reference to something obvious that isn't obvious to me. Are you referring to something specific?
- kelseyfrog 4y agoNo, nothing specific. I was genuinely hoping that someone smarter/more into the topic might reference something specific.
- jimkleiber 4y agoAh ok, I hope someone smarter than I will too :-)