Saturday, June 06, 2009

An Immodest Proposal

I think I have found The Answer -- or an answer, which is about as much as one can hope.

We were kickin' around the Electoral College today, bemoaning the States that have pledged their delegates to follow the popular vote, which is a bad idea in many ways (some states would even compel following the national popular vote; so much for your state's voice, hey?). We floated some alternative suggestions -- pick electors by pullin' names from a hat, have 'em pick who to vote for by pulling candidate's names from a hat, etc. -- when it occurred to me:

We've got states in dire need of money, right?

Electors increasingly don't have to make up their own minds, just do as the vox pop. tells 'em.

So why not auction off the position? It'd be a real godsend for California, even helpful here in Indiana, where the State .gov is trying to live within its freshly-reduced means. Why not?

Sure, there's some risk of a wealthy person or group buyin' the election but this is claimed every election anyway -- might as well make it official!

Auction off seats on the Electoral College! Do it for the children!

Update: Scary video from some goofball.

More Update: D'ye suppose I could get Tam to make this a plank of the "No We Can't" party of grownups?

8 comments:

reflectoscope said...

Make sure they're Ikea seats. If the winner can't put them together, re-open bidding.

Jim

Sam said...

I like one of Hwinleins idesa. When you vote, you must deposit the equivalent of one once of gold.

Then, you have to solve a few easy math problems. If you solve them, you can then proceed to vote. After you deposit your vote, you get your money back.

If not, your money is forfeit, but you can keep trying until the polls close, as long as you "buy in" each time.

Sam said...

I really should have run that through spell check.

Justin Buist said...

If you want to fix state budget problems I'd say the best bet is to repeal the 17th amendment.

States wouldn't put up with senators that were dipping out of the tax base they they believe is rightfully theirs They'd boot anybody that wanted to tax their citizens because they would see that as money that they could tax and use. Which is a bit more efficient and better for all of us.

We had a bad string of amendments there with the 16th, the 17th, and the 18th. We fixed one of them. Its about time we fix another one.

Roberta X said...

I'm pretty sure I have blogged abut that one before -- I regard the direct election of Senators as a huge mistake.

Ian Argent said...

I've been given to understand by the point of the 17th amendment rolling aroud, a majority of the states were already holding elections for the seat. Repealing it won't change the procedure much at this point.

What needs to be done is void Wickard and prohibit the feds from giving money to the state .govs instead of spending it directly. Good luck with either of those, of course

Standard Mischief said...

What? no one has cracked a joke yet about getting the very best government that money can buy?


WV:linsusar I don't know, maybe an island made out of linen?

DirtCrashr said...

It kinda already happens in CA like that, I think most at the Central Committee level (Bopxer, Feinstein, Pelosi) already are millionaires. Individually you can't attempt to run for office unless you're a multi-millionaire and prepared to go up against the multi-millions that the Machine has received from the Public Employee and SEI-Unions.
Our current Insurance Commissioner spent $4.2 million of his own money in the '06 race.
Generally our Electors don't have to make up their own minds, OR do as the vox pop. tell them - they do as the Machine tells them.