1. #1

    Would anonymous voting in the house and Senate fix the money issue?

    I have often thought about this. If you are a corporation or special interest would you put millions of dollars into a vote that you cannot guarantee? I think not!

    You might ask, how can individuals hold congressman accountable? Well members do more than vote. They negotiate and write laws. Judge them on the jobs/money they bring to the district and the national laws they write/sponsor.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcbound View Post
    I have often thought about this. If you are a corporation or special interest would you put millions of dollars into a vote that you cannot guarantee? I think not!

    You might ask, how can individuals hold congressman accountable? Well members do more than vote. They negotiate and write laws. Judge them on the jobs/money they bring to the district and the national laws they write/sponsor.
    That's a terrible idea that removes a huge level of transparency that should be available to elected representatives constituents. How are they supposed to hold their elected officials accountable when they have no clue how they voted? And do you honestly think that voting would remain anonymous and that lobbyists and influential corporations/groups wouldn't find a way to figure out who voted how?

  3. #3
    I'd rather see politicians wearing badges on their coats, logos of the companies/people that support them. Show us exactly who's paying them off. That'll never happen though.

  4. #4
    Would be a good idea if our politicians weren't corrupt as shit. Giving them anonymity isn't going to help matters. They're still going to vote for whichever lobby gives them more money, you just won't be able to see what they voted for. I suppose neither would the corps, but if what they wanted to pass wasn't getting passed because the politicians they were paying off were screwing them, they'd just figure out another way. Like getting a patsy elected. Oh wait, that already happens.

  5. #5
    Putting term limits on the house and senate would fix more than anonymous voting.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Uko View Post
    Putting term limits on the house and senate would fix more than anonymous voting.
    Term Limits and lost the 2-Party system... "Either you agree with 'The Party Platform' 100% or you are a RINO/DINO and a TRAITOR!!!"... ugh... as if 99% of people don't fall outside of either of the party preferences...
    [color=blue]This thread has lived beyond its life expectancy. ... It's also met the forum quota for posters insulting the intelligence of their peers to grasp the age-old upper hand in argumentation, I believe officially coined by Plato: "Ur, like, dumb and that's why I'm right." Zarhym


  7. #7
    If voting was truly anonymous, corporations could not find who breaks the ranks when their law does not go through. Special interests often hold people accountable, but how often do individuals call about a particular vote if they are not pushed into it by a special interest. It would allow compromise without fear of losing your seat over one vote exaggerating your stance on an issue.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcbound View Post
    If voting was truly anonymous, corporations could not find who breaks the ranks when their law does not go through. Special interests often hold people accountable, but how often do individuals call about a particular vote if they are not pushed into it by a special interest. It would allow compromise without fear of losing your seat over one vote exaggerating your stance on an issue.
    And people could also campaign as X while voting as Y without anyone knowing.

    Your plan would open the gates to an even deeper level of deception without doing anything to incentivize them to break ranks from the bribers.

  9. #9
    Possibly, but maybe breaking ranks is not that bad. We do not have a direct democracy for a reason. Maybe if there was anonymity, the hard votes would be made more often and things would actually be solved. I think bipartisanship would happen more often, and special interests would have less influence simply because results could not be guaranteed.

    Also, how many representatives do you think there would be who would consistently vote against what they think is against the best interest of their districts? I can guarantee one thing, if people in their district are hurting, they are not going to be re elected.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •