Dave, I understand the thought. There is the 'however'. 2/3rds of eligible voters are nearly impossible to achieve. First, not all voters turn out. Even obtaining 2/3rds of those that do turn out is a daunting and challenging task. My take is the best way to resolve this issue is radically changing the way money flows into campaigns.
Dave, I understand the thought. There is the 'however'. 2/3rds of eligible voters are nearly impossible to achieve. First, not all voters turn out. Even obtaining 2/3rds of those that do turn out is a daunting and challenging task. My take is the best way to resolve this issue is radically changing the way money flows into campaigns.
Thanks Mike. The "however" is precisely the point; any legislator worth keeping should be able to motivate 2/3 of the eligible voters in their district to vote to keep them.
I agree on the need to change the way campaigns are financed and will support the necessary Amendment whenever it gets written. The way it's run now, most candidates and pundits give the impression that money equates to votes and that's only true after they're elected.
Dave, I understand the thought. There is the 'however'. 2/3rds of eligible voters are nearly impossible to achieve. First, not all voters turn out. Even obtaining 2/3rds of those that do turn out is a daunting and challenging task. My take is the best way to resolve this issue is radically changing the way money flows into campaigns.
Thanks Mike. The "however" is precisely the point; any legislator worth keeping should be able to motivate 2/3 of the eligible voters in their district to vote to keep them.
I agree on the need to change the way campaigns are financed and will support the necessary Amendment whenever it gets written. The way it's run now, most candidates and pundits give the impression that money equates to votes and that's only true after they're elected.