If we're going to have a Congress, please let them be representative and not majoritarian.

[originalpckelly]

Our system is not representative, if you can get past the idea that a total stranger has been charged with representing you, the next major flaw of representative government, as organized in our country, is the lack of proportionality for House and Senate votes.

Right now, if a candidate wins 51% of the vote, the winning party/candidate will have 100% of the power/representation in the Congress for a given district/state.

If we had a fair system, the 51% would only have 51% of the representation/power in the Congress.

The lack of proportionality in either house of Congress is an inherently undemocratic and majoritarian practice, one that leaves massive numbers of people spread throughout America without loyal representation in the Congress from their region. This cuts both ways, both Democrats and Republicans are left without representation in Congress. Why don't you deserve to have loyal representation if you live in a red state/district? Shouldn't you have someone from your part of the world representing you in Congress?

A very simple system of proportionality, based upon the popular vote could be implemented to solve this great inequity. If a candidate for office receives 10,000 votes, they should be able to cast a vote on behalf of those 10,000 people in Congress. Each vote should be tallied using these large numbers, it can be simply done on a computer, or even by hand with someone moderately skilled in basic math. Direct proportionality would give the 51% their rightful 51% of power in Congress, but it would also give the 49% their rightful 49% of power in Congress.

[originalpckelly]

1. Aw, yes, another idea floats to the bottom of the pond.

For there is no will, and no possibility of change. It is wasted energy trying to think, because those thoughts are action-less. I am not surprised that we're in dire straits, in fact it only makes sense.

[aquart]

2. Democracy is based on majority rules.

What type of government do YOU have in mind? Since you do not care for democracy?

[blwpyrtv]

4. Majority rule still applies

If I understand this idea, it would still be a majority who decides whether or not a given bill passed. That said, I need to know more before forming an opinion about it.

Now instant runoff voting, there's a reform that would do more honor to the precept of majority rule than the plurality contests our elections use now.

[originalpckelly]

5. Actually, that's the system I have in mind, but ours is not proportional.

The majority may only be a majority by 51% but that 51% has 100% of the representation in Congress from a given area.

In my system, majority would still rule, with proportional control. Although, I have concerns with representative government, this is fairer way of doing it.

[blwpyrtv]

3. question

Would there be any limit on the number of people voting in Congress?

[originalpckelly]

6. No.

The most obvious problem with that would be statistically insignificant representatives, these people would not have floor privileges, only the top few with statistically significant vote counts would be able to speak or attend Congress in person.

What statistically significant representatives there are, would have their time apportioned amongst themselves. In other words, a district/state would be given a certain amount of speaking time, and that time would be sliced up proportionally based upon the number of people a representative had vote for them in an election.

So, in other words, each congressional district would be given 60 minutes of speaking time. If a Democratic representative received 75% of the vote in a given district, they would have 45 minutes to speak on the floor. On the other hand, the Republican received 24% of the vote, they'd get 15 minutes of the time. The 1% representative(s) would not have floor privileges.

It would still be possible to have a majority in Congress, but each district would have a representative from either of the current parties, or another party if it should arise at a future date.

In addition, this system might cause people to pursue direct democracy. As long as someone is qualified to be a representative in the US Constitution, they could run for office and vote for themselves.

A system of electronic, over the internet, voting could be instituted to cast votes. If someone is no longer interested in representing themselves, they would be counted as present, undecided, or some other neutral voting position. At the next election they would be able to vote for another candidate, or not vote and not have representation.