This idea of a new system of voting was devised by myself and a few other classmates during an English class last year. It draws upon a few ideas that we’ve heard being bandied about by people we admire. I hadn’t given it much thought until I was listening to Joe Rogan last night, he and Jeff Ross were talking about the 2016 elections and the candidates. Last night I found out that Donald Trump is a candidate in the presidential election. As is Dan Bilzerian (at least I think he still is). All this started to make me rethink our idea of a new, reformed voting system.
The basis of the idea was that a person’s voting power would be based on their expertise (or knowledge) of the particular subject they would be voting on. Those who were knowledgeable on the topic of the vote would ‘count’ more.
This would be facilitated by a small test before voting, questions would be set by an independent panel and be undertaken just before inputting your vote.
We felt this system would help mitigate some of the problems in the current voting system, such as the ‘protest vote.’ According to wikipedia that’s “is a vote cast in an election to demonstrate the caster’s dissatisfaction with the choice of candidates or refusal of the current political system.” Recently in the UK general election a party called UKIP garnered 12% of the vote, an increase of 9% since the last, or to say a 4-fourfold increase. This was mainly recognised as a protest vote.
Now if we changed to our method of voting, those voting in protest will generally know little about every other parties’ policies and thus count for little in the vote share. Or in the other case that they do understand all the individual policies then their vote will count for a larger share and thus signify that there really is something wrong with our current political system.
While there are still other plot holes and hijinks to be covered (I think I will have to do a pt 2 later on) I think that this honestly would be a rather good alternative to our current system.