A rant:
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/12/the_politics_of_cause_and_effect.html
The short article linked above explains one of the many problems we have with the current manifestation of our government; the delay in seeing the results of our decisions in the voting booth. One cause is the usually interminable slow process of our elected representatives enacting and implementing policy changes to effect necessary changes, whether at the local, state, or federal levels. Unless they have a personal agenda or are otherwise motivated. [ Wink wink ] Think of the Patriot Act or the TARP act.
While due diligence and thoughtful deliberations are necessary to achieve needed changes, the dog and pony shows we see in our governing bodies obscure our ability to connect cause and effect. It seemingly starts with tight-lipped politicians who refuse to be open and transparent about their thought processes, rightfully fearful they will reveal their lack of depth and clarity, thus exposing their inability or unwillingness to think long-term and big picture for the common good. Or fearful they'll lose the support of special interest constituencies necessary to retain their incumbency. So they resort to orchestration of the publicly seen process, a liturgy to sustain an illusion of openness and transparency and public duty.
Then come the drawn out bureaucratic processes of study groups, hearings soliciting stakeholder and public comments, trial balloons of flawed proposals subsequently returned or redirected to staff or committee or board or commission for further review or refinement. All of this occurs within the supposition (or desperately held hope) there's an ethos and culture within the hired government bureaucracy of ethical conduct, competence, and stewardship. Which given the odds, are likely isolated to only a few departments within the bureaucracy.
Earlier I stated, "It seemingly starts with tight-lipped politicians..." It would be more accurate to say it starts with the electorate, most of whom pay scant attention to the issues, who themselves are trapped in a short attention span prison, consumed with their pressing personal needs, despair, and distractions; unwilling to think critically, and more committed to relationships than principles. And then there are those who would naturally, instinctively, and cynically take advantage of their failure (refusal?) to think long-term and big picture. Those would be the so-called political class; the thought leaders, the deal makers, those lobbying and jockeying for advantage, the king makers, those pandering to increasingly narrow special interests.
I believe bell curve distribution of attributes are usually accurate. Bell curves don't have to be symmetrical and pretty, but they're usually workable depictions. And societal structures are historically pyramids.
Walt Kelly, creator of the Pogo comics, said it best in 1970.
Rant over.
Carl Milsted, Jr on Dec 3, 2025 5:48 PM
Robert's Rules of Order and variations thereon only works with a good faith parliamentary body. It breaks down when you have participants gaming the system.
Libertarians are notorious, BTW. Their ability to game the system is in the Robert Byrd range. The amount of gaming and backstabbing I have personally witnessed on various committees and conventions is truly stunning.
The solution is Range Voting between all variants of a bill. No amending the current amendment of a bill. All variants which has sufficient sponsors go up for vote simultaneously. Legislators rate each variant on a 0-10 star system -- with none of the above as one of the options. Option with the highest score wins and everyone can unambiguously see the positions of all legislators.
Chris Price on Dec 5, 2025 9:20 PM
in response to
comment_263_1
That's an interesting idea, has it ever been implemented in an American governing body long enough to validate it?
Carl Milsted, Jr on Dec 6, 2025 9:01 AM
in response to
comment_263_2
Miss America Pageant, perhaps?
High diving, gymnastics, and figure skating events, definitely.
It's the only practical way for multiple "voters" to choose between multiple options.
Oh, and valedictorian is decided by a range vote. Each grade is a score from 0 to 4...
But for politics, alas no, save for some experiments I did in Buncombe County.
Some Range Voting enthusiasts launched "The Center for Election Science" and then the academics they included decided to cuck and just Approval Voting. I was so pissed.
Chris Price on Dec 9, 2025 7:15 PM
in response to
comment_263_3
Ah, I failed to make the connection between the term "Range Voting" and the examples you shared. Gracias.
Carl Milsted, Jr on Dec 10, 2025 10:15 PM
in response to
comment_263_4
And a Range Vote is MUCH easier to tally. Counts from precincts simply add together.
Back in 2020 launched an online simulation of plurality, range, and ranked choice (counted as instant runoff). It is still running here: https://quiz2d.com/g2020/countCombined.php?isCitizen=C
if doing the vote is too much work, you can go straight to the tally to see how others voted. (The winner for Range was originally someone moderate like Yang. It is now Bernie Sanders because most of those taking it are students and I stopped promoting others to take the test for a long time.
Note how difficult instant runoff if when you have a full slate of candidates! Both to fill in the ballots and to take! You cannot do an elimination round for any precinct until all precincts reported all their complete slates. Newspapers will throw away most of the information. Voters will never get a feel for how the people voted overall.
Range is easy to report. And budding small parties can being showing up years before they become viable. Popularity is a signal.
You must be logged in to comment
