A modest proposal for Minnesota elections

with apologies to Jonathan Swift

We'll be voting tomorrow (and we're grateful for the opportunity). For some candidates we'll be chasing someone who seems like they'll represent our major values. In other cases, we'll be chasing the lessor of two evils, if that can be discerned. The US system of politics makes it really tough to get a strong third party going. That makes it to easy to have a candidate and/or platform combination that's just a little better than the other to carry an election. This gets further compounded by the growing geographic distribution of most Democrats living mostly in urban locales and most Republicans being suburban or rural. (Watch tomorrow's results make that assessment look idiotic!) We strongly suspect that many other voters, and maybe even a greater proportion of those eligible to vote, might not be happy with the options available in any given election. That's what caused us to conjure up the idea of a Minnesota constitutional amendment, our modest proposal.

For every contested, partisan, position on a ballot, the ballot must contain a third option:

NONE OF THE ABOVE

If the "NONE" option receives the most votes, the major political parties must pay for another campaign and election with different candidates than the ones rejected by the voters.

Photo by J. Harrington

We don't care whether our proposal complements or replaces talk of eliminating caucuses and going to primary elections, except that the same option must be included in a primary. This proposal has at least one benefit over Ranked Choice Voting, it provides voters with a clear, and certainly less confusing, opportunity to have their voice heard and would simplify vote counting.

An alternative approach would be to restore and actively enforce against Republicans and Democrats laws like "the Sherman Act of 1890, the Clayton Act of 1914and the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914. These Acts, first, restrict the formation of cartels and prohibit other collusive practices regarded as being in restraint of trade. Second, they restrict the mergers and acquisitionsof organizations that could substantially lessen competition. Third, they prohibit the creation of a monopoly and the abuse of monopoly power.^[1]"

Now all we need to do is find some "clean politics, good government" legislators to carry our bill. Hmmm. That may be a problem unless we can find clean politics, good government Independent legislators. Is this system rigged or what. GO VOTE ANYHOW!

Why I Voted the Socialist Ticket

By Vachel Lindsay

I am unjust, but I can strive for justice.

My life’s unkind, but I can vote for kindness.

I, the unloving, say life should be lovely.

I, that am blind, cry out against my blindness.

Man is a curious brute—he pets his fancies—

Fighting mankind, to win sweet luxury.

So he will be, though law be clear as crystal,

Tho’ all men plan to live in harmony.

Come, let us vote against our human nature,

Crying to God in all the polling places

To heal our everlasting sinfulness

And make us sages with transfigured faces.

********************************************
Thanks for visiting. Come again when you can.
Please be kind to each other while you can.