When Congress votes on a bill it's generally required that at least a majority of those holding office must vote for it in order for passage of said bill.
In other words, there are generally over 50 percent of the House required for vote passage , and the same for the Senate. In certain instances a super majority is required.
As it stands now, in local elections, a bill is passed with a majority of those VOTING only. Put simply, if an election is held and only 3 people show up, two of them vote for and one against, then the bill is passed.
Those in office who are insistent on spending our money willy-nilly on every hare-brained scheme which comes to mind know this and schedule the elections accordingly.
What do you think of a proposition which would require the same percentage of votes as in Congress to get an increase in your taxes passed? There would be panic in the Board of Supervisors chambers and the City Councils in all areas affected.
I know that wouldn't be practical to pass, so how about requiring a mere 50% of REGISTERED voters to VOTE in an election which takes money from us via taxes. Not 50% of registered voters to vote FOR the tax, but just 50% to show up at the polls and vote? So if 50% of the registered voters in a city or county show up to vote and the sum total of all votes is in favor of a tax increase, then it becomes law.
But if the sum total is against, then it doesn't.
I believe this is much fairer than the current system where a few people show up due to voter apathy yet the bill is passed because of the 2 out of 3 votes.
As it stands now, if a County Supervisor or a City Councilman gets word from some busy-body who thinks it would be great to put in a park near their home, he/she gets a petition signed by residents of that area and approaches the Supervisor handling his district. But even if he lives in BFE where there is nothing but cactus and a small pct of the total population, they will probably get the Supervisor or Councilman to put it in the next election. The busybody will then advertise like crazy in their neighborhood and if it's put on a vote where there is no interest, and a good portion of those living in that community DO vote as a result of the advertising, then it stands a good chance of passage. And then the entire community has to pay not only for the parks construction, but the increase in the budget for Parks and Rec to maintain it. And up go the taxes.
Or imagine you are a worker who has a chance to vote on a raise in pay for yourself or better working conditions, etc., at no cost to you but a drive to the voting booth and cast your vote, you'd do it even if it inconvenienced you a little.
Now try to think of one group which which does just that. Can you think of any? I'll give you a hint. They have the largest Union and the most powerful lobbying group in the US and most states.
Right.. Teachers. The one group which combines the carrots of the welfare of kids with the added bonus of promising better things for them in the future. The only group who can make you feel guilty about taking your money.
And (gasp) should the measure fail, they can apply pressure on the supervisors to get it put on the next election (ad infinitum) until it is.
BUT if it was required that 50% or more of registered voters participate in the vote, all these little special elections in the dead of winter with a foot of snow on the ground when few people would vote will disappear, and they'll only have votes when there is a reason (like somebodies term of office is over and another rip-off artist is vieing for the job) or when there is an emergency requiring a vote.
WE are the people who are supplying the money to run government. WE shouldn't allow those elected to bleed us dry by allowing passage of spending bills we all have to pay by a vote of the few.
I am one of those "we" who would love to see a change in the current voting situation.
