P-poll Now
Universal Health Care? Yes or No
Funding for War? Yes or No
Immigration Reform? Yes or No
How would you vote? Your U.S. Representative should know.
Let’s require U.S. Representatives to poll their constituents regarding bills scheduled for a vote and publish the results at house.gov. For example:
HR 101 $900 Billion Stimulus Plan
The People say: Nay (68% vs. 32%)
The House says: Yea (51% vs. 49%)
In a digital democracy, the will of the people should be visible on every House bill. Of course, we must allow Reps to vote their conscience, but we will also be free to vote them out of office.
Comments (6)
Direct and instant democracy is not such a good idea. It leads to tyranny of the majority or of the mob driven by the fad-idea of the moment. Our Founding Fathers purposely chose a republic, a representational form of government that requires some time and deliberation through two Houses of Congress before changes can be implemented. We already have the opportunity to call, write, or email our representatives whenever we wish. Instant polls are not a good idea.
This is not a direct democracy idea. As the description points out, Reps should be able to vote however they want. Rather, this is a transparency and educational tool.
U.S. Reps already take informal polls regarding phone calls, letters, and emails for and against certain bills. However, they don't publish this information, so nobody knows how Reps' districts want them to vote. A public preference poll would simply make the will of the people visible. U.S. Reps should not have to obey that will. Citizens, at election time, can hold them accountable, same as they do now.
But this is also an educational tool. By linking citizens more tightly to their U.S. Reps, we could get a better sense of how our government works and we could better appreciate the decisions that have to be made.
A preference poll is not a proposal for mob rule; it is a tool for connecting citizens and representatives, making a better government for all.
I believe we need public engagement that incorporates dialogue and deliberation in order to get thoughtful meaningful input and to create opportunities for collaborative implementation. Surveys that measure highly variable opinion no longer cut it as a stand alone method of public involvement. When people get a chance to hear a variety of perspectives in small groups of diverse residents before sharing input, leaders get more useful and meani gful input and they build coalitions of active citizens to help carry out the collaboratively developed plan of action.
I understand where dr.jimsmall is coming from.
However, the whole idea behind P-poll is empowerment of constituents through digital means. Yes, we have the opportunity to call, write or e-mail our representatives whenever we wish. However, if a politician (who preserves his or her own perspective with regard to a vote) reaches out to his or her constituents through a poll, there is likely to be more participation.
Our representatives and senators hear from others all the time - lobbyists for example. They often have special and rather regular access to our elected officials. It's important, I think, for our elected officials to get a keen sense of what their own constituents think about an issue. Again, they are elected officials for a reason and they should not be bound to vote exactly as their constituents may vote at P-poll. Yet, it gives the elected official the pulse of what's happening in their community of constituents. This is not mob rule by any stretch of the imagination. Let's make government more transparent. Let's make government better for all of us. This is an important idea and I am supportive of it.
Change "Let’s require U.S. Representatives to poll their constituents regarding bills scheduled for a vote and publish the results" to "Let’s require U.S. Representatives to INFORM AND ENABLE THEIR CONSTITUENTS TO VOTE regarding bills scheduled for a vote and publish the results," then I'd say yes, as long as the polls were word-neutral, especially since they won't be binding. It's important to keep in mind that the public actually changes its mind a lot more than one realizes.
Universal Health Care? No. I've seen socialized medicine in Europe and it isn't pretty
Funding for War? What war?
Immigration Reform? Yes!!! We can't afford to pay for handouts to U.S. citizens, much less the entire world