"Only when the people are set free to vote both parties out, instead of being forced to bounce back and forth between them like a pathetic, kitten-like, powerless captive audience, will the parties listen.
Only when the people can apply a newly restored power in their votes to say to the parties, "WE DON'T NEED YOU ANY MORE!!" Get your negative garbage ads off our screens!! Get your slander OUT OF OUR FACES!!" will the parties be forced to give up these vile practices.
The parties do it under the present system because it works. Only when it doesn't work any more will they stop." --RIGHT TO NOMINATE, PG. 193
The Right to Nominate Amendment, by bringing real competition to the parties in the form of community-nominated independent NON-party candidates in every election, will give us back our original, Constitutional form of government without infringing on anyone's rights, not even those of abusive, election-rigging party strategists.
Only then can we discipline all parties and all party politicians out of their vile campaign practices, and establish Civil Discourse as the context of our elections.
Question: Would you, the Reader, be willing to take a fresh look at a long-abandoned idea? An idea abandoned not for lack of merit, but abandoned in despair that it could ever be done?
That idea is mentioned above: Civil Discourse.
In America. As the basic foundation for our political culture and the context of our politics?
If You are normal, you probably despaired of this possibility long ago (but with regret). Well, get ready! The Right to Nominate amendment is aimed squarely at these results: 1.) Civil Discourse as the context of our elections; and 2.) breaking the chokehold of the "party system" as a form of government, a form which restricts our freedom (i.e., allows only PARTY members to be elected).
If you're inclined to carefully analyze our nation's problems, here is a bullet-point outline of the reasoning:
1 * Only power can check power.
[ moral lectures, moaning, complaining and wringing hands may win sympathy, but nothing will change as a result. So, forget that. Politics is about applying power.]
2 * No American's rights or liberties may be taken away. Period.
[ any systemic change to our government that would do so would be a "cure worse than the disease".]
How do we then, as citizens, apply power in a way that will create and sustain Civil Discourse in our politics? Put another way, How do we force parties and party politicians to STOP their slanderous, lying, garbage-filled campaign tactics without violating any of their rights or liberties?
3 * Freedom is our chosen context for life as a nation.
4 * So the answer to our desire for Civil Discourse must come through increased freedom: the freedom to establish for ourselves another power base (other than political parties) which we can then tap into any time. Free competition is our answer. Real competition.
("WE DON'T NEED EITHER OF YOU ANY MORE!!")
[Americans must become aware of how the party system restricts our freedom. Being trapped between two bad choices is no longer an anomaly. It has become the norm. The party system represses competition into a "parties-only" format. (How convenient, for the parties!)
The Framers' Constitutional design was intended to let the people produce the candidates for office. When Thomas Jefferson at one point asked James Madison if he would be returning to Congress, Madison replied that it depended on the "spontaneous suffrage" of his countrymen in Virginia.
The people were intended to produce candidates; and were not supposed to have that high privilege of freedom taken away by self-serving committees of collusion within parties.
Do you think we are really free to vote for whomever we like? Sorry, but that is delusional. Over 98% of our "choices" are between party pols. One party politician, or another. So, if you like our politics as they are, just hold your nose, pull the lever, and tell yourself you're really free to vote for anyone you like.
But if you really care about living in freedom, consider this: If freedom is to be won back in America, we must restore our Constitutional form of government and rid ourselves, not of parties, but of the "parties-only" system, which is a self-perpetuating, closed system in control of our government.]
5 * In our republic, the "other power base" referred to above can only mean a source of candidates who are not from the parties.
6 * Which, in turn, can only be accomplished on a permanent basis by a Constitutional amendment, a mechanism fixed in law, providing us with the means to nominate independents-- NON-party candidates.
THEN, power can check power. The power of the people (and 'independents' in particular) can check the power of the parties.
Right now, nothing really checks them.
"THROW THE BUMS OUT !!" IS AN HONORABLE EXERCISE ESSENTIAL TO REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY
The problem is this: We, the people, have "thrown the bums out" over and over, countless times. And they just keep sneaking back in. (Either the same 'bums', or others just like them.) They come from a seemingly endless supply called "the party system". Under the rule of parties, things just keep getting worse.
Some people have become so discouraged by this endless party merry-go-round, so disgusted, that they now think representative government itself "just doesn't work"--a catastrophically wrong, dangerous idea.
It's not representative government that doesn't work, it's the "parties-only" system! (Parties-only, in control of government.) We must change this form of government, which is not in the Constitution, or we will lose our Republic.
How do we accomplish such monumental change? A fast-thinking lawyer friend, hearing the Right to Nominate concept for the first time, instantly got its implications: "We could get rid of all the politicians!!" he blurted.
Exactly. He got it
("WE DON'T NEED EITHER OF YOU ANY MORE!!")
We in the Right to Nominate movement say this: until we, the people, have the ability to get rid of politicians whenever we choose, and replace them with persons better to our liking, then we are not really in control of our government. We are not "sovereign", as the Framers designed us to be.
Only when we can vote in respected independent NON-party candidates (thus voting both parties out) in as many elections, and for as many offices as we choose, will we be able to enforce our moral will by absolutely requiring civility and fiscal accountability from candidates, among other things.
THEN, voter power will finally check party power.
And we say this, with every ounce of energy we have: We have suffered long enough! With a corrupt party system that doesn't allow getting rid of them! When one party politician gets voted out, who replaces them? Another party politician! So the parties, which are not in the Constitution, nevertheless have taken (and kept) perpetual control of our government.
They do so, first, by restricting access to the ballot to their own members (plus a few 'oddballs' who are no threat). By restricting access, they restrict American freedom. (And have been doing so for many years.) We Americans have the Right to nominate our own candidates.
For real competition to come to our political marketplace, we must be able to say to the dual monopoly of the parties:
"WE DON'T NEED YOU ANY MORE!! Get your garbage off our screens! and your slander OUT OF OUR FACES!!"
Longing for a Turnover
Recent polls show that an astounding 67% of American voters favor a 100% turnover of the members of Congress--a total replacement. Americans are angry and disillusioned about the dysfunction of this party-system government.
We totally agree. But like other Americans, we believe our vote is a profound responsibility; so we also have to ask two questions: 1) Do we want to throw out the good with the bad?
And 2) What would it accomplish to throw out of office all party politicians, if they are simply replaced by more party politicians?
So we advocate getting rid of most party officeholders, but not all. About two-thirds of them should be turned out and sent home, permanently : the "go-along-to-get-along", "dance with them that brung ya" crowd who demean their office and do the legwork to make the corrupt party system what it is.
Two out of three present office holders must be replaced by the people's representatives, nominated independently by the people, in order to restore control of government to the people.
There is a small minority of party officeholders who are decent and able, who belong in government; and we should keep them. IF they publicly and convincingly swear off putting party clients and special interests ahead of the people. But we must choose those few carefully, and weed out the rest.
And we say this:
Until American voters can get rid of wasteful, lying, slandering party office holders whenever we so choose, and replace them with our own representatives [i.e., nominated by us, the people] and thus rid ourselves of party representatives pretending to be "the people's" representatives, then we will not yet be the "sovereign and free people" we think we are..