It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Is Proportional Representation the future for the US?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:13 PM
a reply to: ketsuko

So are you trying to take power from the central government or give representation to the people.

Is there a fault with PR or is this just a personal opinion that COTUS is the answer?

Could COTUS work in conjunction with PR and be an improved form of governing?

posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:19 PM
a reply to: AlaskanDad

I find it odd that you're up here in Alaska and proposing something that would effectively make AK representatives a complete non-issue in DC.

posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:20 PM
a reply to: seeker1963

While placing blame is the norm, I ask how it changes anything.

As for lost vigilance of the voters, a system that is broken discourages many from particpating.

I ask why you are not discussing PR and beating the dead horse of our broken system, rather than saddling the fresh horse?

posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:31 PM
a reply to: burdman30ott6

I find it odd that you're up here in Alaska and proposing something that would effectively make AK representatives a complete non-issue in DC.

Please give details on which you have drawn this conclusion,

I do not propose state lose their reps, but rather the other parties are represented in accordance by the percent of votes they received.

so if the vote went 80% R - 10% D - 10%-I, you would have 8 republicans a 1 democrat and 1 independent would be representing AK.

edit on 29-4-2014 by AlaskanDad because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-4-2014 by AlaskanDad because: removed a un needed sentence and typos

posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:14 PM
This is probably a waste of time because it could not and will not ever happen, but.....
What if congress was run more like a business? A group of people we can call oversears that act like CEO. Maybe 50, maybe 100???

Somebody doesnt do their job, they are fired on the spot. Take applications to fill the vacancy.

posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:29 PM

originally posted by: shaneslaughta
Its not a two party system, only the masses keep voting for the two parties.

Depends on what portion of the election cycle one is looking at. Closed primaries are an example of how established political parties can control access to the ballot box by herding voters into only voting for those of their parties. Typically, such established rules are set by the parties themselves and limit who will represent that political party.

For instance, in Nevada, the parties there established a closed primary, in which Republican's can only vote for Republican candidates and Democrats the same. Persons outside of the party affiliation are required to register under a particular party to be able to vote within that party's primary.

Of course, as we move closer to an actual election, the election is open and free regardless of party affiliation.

What needs to be done is people need to get their heads out of their rears and use the brain god gave them.

Everyone needs to vote for an alternative party. EVERYONE.

Then the truth shall be revealed.

Agreed, but why vote to take away that which you had...once you can vote yourself money from the treasury, surely one wouldn't stop.

A democracy is always temporary in nature;
it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.
A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover
that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.
From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates
who promise the most benefits from the public treasury,
with the result that every democracy will finally collapse
due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship --Alexander Tytler

posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:38 PM

originally posted by: ketsuko
How about we go back to the ideas of the COTUS?

Abolish the amendment that took Senators away from the states so that the states are represented in Washington. Then, go back to awarding Representatives to every so many 100,000 people. Make the House a body that meets electronically so that House Reps much stay in their Districts except for a few, very specifically defined days per year when they meet in committee or as a whole body. That way they stay accountable and available to their constituents. And with that many House Reps, it gets harder to buy off the whole body.

I do believe that with technology today we can maintain a bicameral Congress with the 17th Amendment repealed and fine-tuning your idea with regards to the Peoples' House (representatives). I say we need to look at who we are offering up to those offices though. As a whole, the system (starting at the People) has succumbed to apathy, corruption and flat-out too many years of believing it is the job of the Federal Government to run our day-to-day business.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in