CAMPAIGN REFORM

81ad891fc383767046ea9bcc86a220a7bf8373c1

ELISE STEFANIK'S STANCE ON CAMPAIGN REFORM

“Radical Democrats are planning their most aggressive move yet: a PERMANENT ELECTION INSURRECTION,” says one ad paid for by Stefanik's campaign. “Their plan to grant amnesty to 11 MILLION illegal immigrants will overthrow our current electorate and create a permanent liberal majority in Washington.” (The Hill, September, 16th, 2021)

LONNY'S STANCE & SOLUTION ON CAMPAIGN REFORM

Ms. Stefanik identifies that there are major issues in the way campaigning could be affected by allowing "amnesty" to 11 Million Illegal / Unregistered residents in America. Campaigning has gotten out of control. I agree that allowing open "amnesty" to a mass quantity of previously "illegal" residents could create a massive shift in the way that our current elections would turn out but she bases her observations on the "fact" that the majority of these "new" citizens would vote Democrat and would throw the system into chaos. I believe she is correct in the current thought process but there is the problem; candidates and Parties are pandering to people rather than to offer solutions that benefit the greater good of the entire population.

 

Rather than focusing on the groups of people needed to win elections, candidates should focus on ideas and solutions for the people they represent. A big part of the problem is that  the "little guy" has little to no chance to take part in the political process because Party Politics play a huge role in this and weed out lesser known, lower budget candidates by overwhelming their "hand-picked" candidate with huge influxes of money while letting the lesser-known, possibly better choice be removed from campaigns solely because of money. I would suggest that there be a nationwide campaign fund. Donors can give whatever they want, but it is equally distributed between all the candidates on the ballot. This would give every legal candidate the ability to compete and not just be buried by those that have large donors and PAC support.

Rather than Party primaries, I suggest Open primaries where all candidates "primary" each other and the top 2, or 4 (or whatever number to move forward is identified) progress to the general election. It is possible that all candidates in the general election could be from the same political party or, possibly none from a major political party.

Another huge problem with campaigning is that most candidates run on  ideas and promises but they rarely follow through with those promises. The voting populace needs to have easier access to insight on how their elected officials are representing or misrepresenting them and then, based on those stats, the people need to hold their elected officials accountable and responsible for their actions and inactions.

Another idea to help readily focus on the needs of the people could be ranked voting. Rank choice voting allows voters to vote for multiple options, ranking them and progressing them through a series of votes until the option that best fits the needs of the people wins, theoretically.