- if handed a ballot with this issue on it, would mark the “no” column.
and if that were the case, i propose that you consider more seriously that second point. if voting is the path to better outcomes, you want always (1) more voter turnout AND (2) more precise translation of voter preference into policy.
i feel that what we’ve got today is something like a B, B- on voter turnout, but an unambiguous F on how votes drive policy. that if our democracy was somehow such that the conversation being had was “don’t forget to vote against EARN IT on your ballot” instead of “don’t forget to write your legislators about EARN IT”, we’d both find that a better system? ambiguities, caveats abound. i’m not literally saying that every policy issue ought be on the ballot, just that if the formal systems for fairly translating individual preference into policy were more capable, we wouldn’t feel any need to reach for informal methods like writing legislators or rejecting authority.
- don’t vote.
- if handed a ballot with this issue on it, would mark the “no” column.
and if that were the case, i propose that you consider more seriously that second point. if voting is the path to better outcomes, you want always (1) more voter turnout AND (2) more precise translation of voter preference into policy.
i feel that what we’ve got today is something like a B, B- on voter turnout, but an unambiguous F on how votes drive policy. that if our democracy was somehow such that the conversation being had was “don’t forget to vote against EARN IT on your ballot” instead of “don’t forget to write your legislators about EARN IT”, we’d both find that a better system? ambiguities, caveats abound. i’m not literally saying that every policy issue ought be on the ballot, just that if the formal systems for fairly translating individual preference into policy were more capable, we wouldn’t feel any need to reach for informal methods like writing legislators or rejecting authority.