Remember the “little hand grenade,@ backnin the late 80s, early 90s - Ross Perot? He was a smart businessman but his motivations were, at best, unclear. He said some good things and I was on board, initially. Smart businessman, yes, but delinquent in essential elements.
Remember the “little hand grenade,@ backnin the late 80s, early 90s - Ross Perot? He was a smart businessman but his motivations were, at best, unclear. He said some good things and I was on board, initially. Smart businessman, yes, but delinquent in essential elements.
POTUS Trump has, may have, that missing essentials. But I can’t define it: he ticks the correct boxes, but many do; perhaps it’s a knowable unknown?
Anyway, I’m hoping there are enough supporters in congress, both houses, that his (our) vision can be put back in place. Even the best QB without a more than adequate O-line will get sacked too often (which we’ve seen).
It is a well-known and easily demonstrable fact that the members of the US Congress and the State Legislatures do not read, evaluate or debate any of the particulars of the Legislation they vote on. They cannot read or debate the issues because the Bills approach 2000 pages each. And there are sixty to one hundred new bills for them to vote on every day they are in session.
During the 1992 Presidential campaign, Ross Perot called attention to this insanity with a diplomatic observation that "a general lack of accountability among elected officials and those in the bureaucracy was the one specific reason that the people in America suffered".
Mr. Perot then suggested that the best and perhaps only way to make government officials accountable was to include the citizens in the decision-making process - every hour, every day.
He went on to note that this can easily be done with computers and called the proposed mechanism
THE ELECTRONIC TOWNHALL.
With this computer program every interested citizen can indicate whether or not they agree or disagree with every line item of every law, policy and program on the books or that was being advanced. It can be used at every level of government and in every jurisdiction.
To prevent chaos the basic law, our Constitution and Bill of Rights would be exempt from review.
Mr. Perot speculated that the Founding Fathers would probably have done the same had the technology been available. He referred to it as the Fourth Branch of government; The Citizens Branch / The Electronic Townhall.
If the government is truly of the people, by the people and for the people then what better way is there to perfect every section of the various laws and policies that do effect each and every one of us every single day?
It would not be difficult to expect at least 500 thousand qualified citizens, per congressional district, to read four pages of law or proposed law and get their Ratify or Annual input every day the congress is in session. The results could be aggregated, made known and we would all be better off.
The program would even allow a citizen to go back and change their vote as they matured. And when a super majority is reached the law/proposed law is either ratified or annulled by immediate recognition of the enforcement mechanisms.
With tens of millions of laws and tens of thousands of taxes there is plenty of work to be done.
According to Mr. Perot, this, the harnessed experience and the combined intelligence of hundreds of thousands or even millions of citizens focused like a laser light on the real issues, will, as surely as night follows the day, perfect every law in our country and eventually it will right every wrong.
Mr. Perot publicly announced his intention to give the fourth branch of government to the people in America if he was elected President.
But this attempt to empower our humanity was so far removed from the business-as-usual-two-party-system that the talking heads and trolls yelled out that Mr. Perot was trying to destroy our Constitution, our government and our way of life.
The ELECTONIC TOWNHALL was denounced as unworkable.
How would the poor participate?
How would fraud be prevented?
What about those who do not know how to use a computer?
In a final act of desperation, the control freaks claimed that letting the average citizen to pass judgment on the individual pieces of public law would lead to chaos and pandemonium.
But we all know the truth: only the concerned will bother to participate.
The media was so intensely negative towards the ELECTRONIC TOWNHALL that Mr. Perot was forced to stop talking about it, but he never withdrew it from his platform.
It’s now been thirty-two years since the proposal.
No other person of national reputation or significant influence has picked up the idea. BUT the big two political parties regularly stage "townhall meetings" where they talk of "reform" and "returning power to the people" and try to link themselves to the empowering part of the idea without adding to its manifestation.
And still we suffer in the hopeless loop of: "candidates with a sense of morality and respect for the Constitution who understand true brotherhood, justice and democracy and who will do the right thing for us each and every time, trust me".
While we cannot make light of sincere individuals who get into public office, we must acknowledge the fact that regardless of who has been elected to public office the problems in our government get more complicated and our people continue to suffer.
Could we possibly admit that our national situation, now being made global, is far too complicated for the President and the 535 elected members of the legislature to manage in our best interests?
You, the person reading this know some of the things we need.
Your friends, our fellow countrymen have their solutions too.
The only way to organize the workable ideas is to create a device that will enable all of us to simultaneously contribute our best thinking and most benevolent experience towards solving our most complicated problems.
That device is THE ELECTRONIC TOWNHALL and the place to begin is with our existing laws.
According to Ross Perot, this is the only way forward.
If I knew that back then, I have forgotten! Thanks for the review of Ross's great idea. I voted for him and the vote ended up being a spoiler, Dems won as a result. I always regretted. . . now, not quite so much!
I think, in retrospect, it was a great idea. The technology easily exists NOW.
However, I would have some caveat's to be able to influence such a momentous decision as a congressional vote. . .
specifications for a "special voter"
-- must be at least 32 yrs old, own 1/2 acre+ of land, and pay ALL major taxes.
-- last conviction of any felony must be 5 yrs old, at least
-- member of Dem or Repub party only, in good standing, no socialist or communist background
-- at least 2 yrs of college education or 6 in a professional trade
-- cannot represent any "constituent group"(i.e. lobbyist)
-- must have a full time job or business with proof of salary or profit for 2 yrs
Citizenship is about the Ratification or Annulment of each line of every law, rule, regulation and supreme court decision on the books or that is on the docket waiting to be turned into law, policy and taxes.
Nothing short of this is going to ameliorate the present situation, nor will we get to the Stars without it.
And now we must decide who gets to participate in this amplified voting, and how the vote is counted and what specific impact the sacred vote has at the business end of government.
Right now, in order to determine how much freight an opinion carries, the first question is:
# 1. Who gets to vote in the: general election?
a. citizens only - Yes No
b. natural born citizens only - Yes No
c. natural born citizens with four natural born grandparents - Yes No
d. naturalized citizens (legal immigrants) - Yes No
e. legal immigrants not yet naturalized - Yes No
f. anyone with a drivers license – Yes - No
# 2. Ages of Voter
g. minimum18 years
h. minimum 21 years
i. minimum 25 years
j. minimum 30 years
k. minimum 33 years
l. minimum 35 years
# 3. Sex of Voter
a. Male – Yes - No
b. Female – Yes - No
c. Non – Binanry - Yes - No
d. Transgender - Yes - No
# 4. Competence of Voter
e. property owners net value over $50,000 - Yes - No
f. property owners net value over $250,000 - Yes - No
g. tax exempt persons – Yes - No
h. those receiving welfare / food stamps – Yes - No
i. those with unpaid child support obligations - Yes - No
j. those receiving WIC – Yes - No
k. those receiving Section 8 – Yes - No
l. those working for government bureaucracies – Yes - No
m. those that will pay a $5000 poll tax - Yes - No
n. those that have paid a minimum of $5000 per year of tax for their combined jurisdictions in excess of any received via SS, Medicare, Medicaid, ATFWDC - Yes - No
# 5. Genetic presence of Voter
a. Male without children – Yes - No
b. Male with children – Yes - No
c. Male with children plural vote – Yes - No
d. Female without children – Yes - No
e. Female with children – Yes - No
f. Female with children plural vote – Yes - No
g. Only married males with children, never divorced can vote. – Yes - No
# 6. Who should be trusted with the responsibility and power of public
office?
a. Only those authorized to vote in the general election - Yes No
b. Male without children – Yes - No
c. Male with children – Yes - No
d. Female without children – Yes - No
e. Female with children – Yes - No
f. Only married males with children, never divorced can hold public office – Yes - No
I was a young Mother, not yet 40 when I voted for the first time. I was just waiting for a businessman to come along and run the country. I enthusiastically voted for Perot, and the next time I ever voted enthusiastically again was for the next businessman that came along, Trump.
Yes; and more is needed.
Remember the “little hand grenade,@ backnin the late 80s, early 90s - Ross Perot? He was a smart businessman but his motivations were, at best, unclear. He said some good things and I was on board, initially. Smart businessman, yes, but delinquent in essential elements.
POTUS Trump has, may have, that missing essentials. But I can’t define it: he ticks the correct boxes, but many do; perhaps it’s a knowable unknown?
Anyway, I’m hoping there are enough supporters in congress, both houses, that his (our) vision can be put back in place. Even the best QB without a more than adequate O-line will get sacked too often (which we’ve seen).
Would someone please test the waters in Kentucky!
It is a well-known and easily demonstrable fact that the members of the US Congress and the State Legislatures do not read, evaluate or debate any of the particulars of the Legislation they vote on. They cannot read or debate the issues because the Bills approach 2000 pages each. And there are sixty to one hundred new bills for them to vote on every day they are in session.
During the 1992 Presidential campaign, Ross Perot called attention to this insanity with a diplomatic observation that "a general lack of accountability among elected officials and those in the bureaucracy was the one specific reason that the people in America suffered".
Mr. Perot then suggested that the best and perhaps only way to make government officials accountable was to include the citizens in the decision-making process - every hour, every day.
He went on to note that this can easily be done with computers and called the proposed mechanism
THE ELECTRONIC TOWNHALL.
With this computer program every interested citizen can indicate whether or not they agree or disagree with every line item of every law, policy and program on the books or that was being advanced. It can be used at every level of government and in every jurisdiction.
To prevent chaos the basic law, our Constitution and Bill of Rights would be exempt from review.
Mr. Perot speculated that the Founding Fathers would probably have done the same had the technology been available. He referred to it as the Fourth Branch of government; The Citizens Branch / The Electronic Townhall.
If the government is truly of the people, by the people and for the people then what better way is there to perfect every section of the various laws and policies that do effect each and every one of us every single day?
It would not be difficult to expect at least 500 thousand qualified citizens, per congressional district, to read four pages of law or proposed law and get their Ratify or Annual input every day the congress is in session. The results could be aggregated, made known and we would all be better off.
The program would even allow a citizen to go back and change their vote as they matured. And when a super majority is reached the law/proposed law is either ratified or annulled by immediate recognition of the enforcement mechanisms.
With tens of millions of laws and tens of thousands of taxes there is plenty of work to be done.
According to Mr. Perot, this, the harnessed experience and the combined intelligence of hundreds of thousands or even millions of citizens focused like a laser light on the real issues, will, as surely as night follows the day, perfect every law in our country and eventually it will right every wrong.
Mr. Perot publicly announced his intention to give the fourth branch of government to the people in America if he was elected President.
But this attempt to empower our humanity was so far removed from the business-as-usual-two-party-system that the talking heads and trolls yelled out that Mr. Perot was trying to destroy our Constitution, our government and our way of life.
The ELECTONIC TOWNHALL was denounced as unworkable.
How would the poor participate?
How would fraud be prevented?
What about those who do not know how to use a computer?
In a final act of desperation, the control freaks claimed that letting the average citizen to pass judgment on the individual pieces of public law would lead to chaos and pandemonium.
But we all know the truth: only the concerned will bother to participate.
The media was so intensely negative towards the ELECTRONIC TOWNHALL that Mr. Perot was forced to stop talking about it, but he never withdrew it from his platform.
It’s now been thirty-two years since the proposal.
No other person of national reputation or significant influence has picked up the idea. BUT the big two political parties regularly stage "townhall meetings" where they talk of "reform" and "returning power to the people" and try to link themselves to the empowering part of the idea without adding to its manifestation.
And still we suffer in the hopeless loop of: "candidates with a sense of morality and respect for the Constitution who understand true brotherhood, justice and democracy and who will do the right thing for us each and every time, trust me".
While we cannot make light of sincere individuals who get into public office, we must acknowledge the fact that regardless of who has been elected to public office the problems in our government get more complicated and our people continue to suffer.
Could we possibly admit that our national situation, now being made global, is far too complicated for the President and the 535 elected members of the legislature to manage in our best interests?
You, the person reading this know some of the things we need.
Your friends, our fellow countrymen have their solutions too.
The only way to organize the workable ideas is to create a device that will enable all of us to simultaneously contribute our best thinking and most benevolent experience towards solving our most complicated problems.
That device is THE ELECTRONIC TOWNHALL and the place to begin is with our existing laws.
According to Ross Perot, this is the only way forward.
If I knew that back then, I have forgotten! Thanks for the review of Ross's great idea. I voted for him and the vote ended up being a spoiler, Dems won as a result. I always regretted. . . now, not quite so much!
I think, in retrospect, it was a great idea. The technology easily exists NOW.
However, I would have some caveat's to be able to influence such a momentous decision as a congressional vote. . .
specifications for a "special voter"
-- must be at least 32 yrs old, own 1/2 acre+ of land, and pay ALL major taxes.
-- last conviction of any felony must be 5 yrs old, at least
-- member of Dem or Repub party only, in good standing, no socialist or communist background
-- at least 2 yrs of college education or 6 in a professional trade
-- cannot represent any "constituent group"(i.e. lobbyist)
-- must have a full time job or business with proof of salary or profit for 2 yrs
Citizenship is about the Ratification or Annulment of each line of every law, rule, regulation and supreme court decision on the books or that is on the docket waiting to be turned into law, policy and taxes.
Nothing short of this is going to ameliorate the present situation, nor will we get to the Stars without it.
And now we must decide who gets to participate in this amplified voting, and how the vote is counted and what specific impact the sacred vote has at the business end of government.
Right now, in order to determine how much freight an opinion carries, the first question is:
# 1. Who gets to vote in the: general election?
a. citizens only - Yes No
b. natural born citizens only - Yes No
c. natural born citizens with four natural born grandparents - Yes No
d. naturalized citizens (legal immigrants) - Yes No
e. legal immigrants not yet naturalized - Yes No
f. anyone with a drivers license – Yes - No
# 2. Ages of Voter
g. minimum18 years
h. minimum 21 years
i. minimum 25 years
j. minimum 30 years
k. minimum 33 years
l. minimum 35 years
# 3. Sex of Voter
a. Male – Yes - No
b. Female – Yes - No
c. Non – Binanry - Yes - No
d. Transgender - Yes - No
# 4. Competence of Voter
e. property owners net value over $50,000 - Yes - No
f. property owners net value over $250,000 - Yes - No
g. tax exempt persons – Yes - No
h. those receiving welfare / food stamps – Yes - No
i. those with unpaid child support obligations - Yes - No
j. those receiving WIC – Yes - No
k. those receiving Section 8 – Yes - No
l. those working for government bureaucracies – Yes - No
m. those that will pay a $5000 poll tax - Yes - No
n. those that have paid a minimum of $5000 per year of tax for their combined jurisdictions in excess of any received via SS, Medicare, Medicaid, ATFWDC - Yes - No
# 5. Genetic presence of Voter
a. Male without children – Yes - No
b. Male with children – Yes - No
c. Male with children plural vote – Yes - No
d. Female without children – Yes - No
e. Female with children – Yes - No
f. Female with children plural vote – Yes - No
g. Only married males with children, never divorced can vote. – Yes - No
# 6. Who should be trusted with the responsibility and power of public
office?
a. Only those authorized to vote in the general election - Yes No
b. Male without children – Yes - No
c. Male with children – Yes - No
d. Female without children – Yes - No
e. Female with children – Yes - No
f. Only married males with children, never divorced can hold public office – Yes - No
g. Depends on the office - Yes - No
h. minimum18 years - Yes - No
i. minimum 21 years - Yes - No
j. minimum 25 years - Yes - No
k. minimum 30 years - Yes - No
l. minimum 33 years - Yes - No
m. minimum 35 years - Yes - No
Ross quit when the deep state told him they would murder his daughter!
really? Did not know that.
I remember this.
Damn, I'm old😵
Thomas, Source please?
This is the cleaned up version
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/26/us/1992-campaign-overview-perot-says-he-quit-july-thwart-gop-dirty-tricks.html#:~:text=At%20a%20time%20when%20Ross,and%20to%20disrupt%20her%20wedding
Memory of event. Was 40 years ago?
Which one? Nancy or Suzanne?
I was a young Mother, not yet 40 when I voted for the first time. I was just waiting for a businessman to come along and run the country. I enthusiastically voted for Perot, and the next time I ever voted enthusiastically again was for the next businessman that came along, Trump.