Here is one high tech idea to make our reps accountable

[Ugnmoose]

I felt this way for a long time, but Al Gore made general mention of it yesterday on KO's Countdown. My idea is to hold prime time televised debates in both the Senate and House when major bills are at issue. The electorate would then be able to view the debate and text message their vote (yea or nay) to their respective rep and have that vote recorded and posted. The scorecard would tell all. If a rep votes in opposition to his/her constitutents, it will be in plain sight for all to see. This should make the gutless wonders think twice about how they vote.

[Clovis Sangrail]

1. erm...

I think that would pretty quickly degenerate into a display of which side had the best war dialer.

[BootinUp]

2. I guess the key

would be getting any participation from the pols in the debate.

[Demeter]

3. I Thought You Were Going To Say Tasers

My bad.

[Hippo_Tron]

4. Will never happen, the networks won't cover it

Even in Britain where Parliament is far more entertaining than our Congress, they don't televise debates anymore.

[tech3149]

8. Government of, by, and for the people

requires that people are aware and involved. Those few people that I interact with on a regular basis don't know squat about what either local, state, or national government was up to and how it would affect their lives. They don't have the time, energy, or interest to find out what's going on. A good deal of that responsibility falls on the shoulders of the corporate media by what the do and don't tell us, but a lot of it falls on our own shoulders. Most of the people I talk to are old enough to know better (they went to school back when there were civics, government, and social studies courses that actually taught you something) and even though they're retired and have the time, they don't search out important news. Most never watch CSPAN or read newspapers that aren't local.

However you look at the situation, we can't make it better without informing people about what "government" is doing when they have a chance to do something to affect the final decision. If the corporate media won't do it, we must. Most of the people I talk to are smart enough to understand that our governmental system is totally eff'd up, they just don't have the information or education to understand the root cause of the problem.

[Ugnmoose]

9. It is the interactive experience that makes this work

The reason people don't care or pay attention is that they don't believe that their voice is heard or acted upon. If they could have their vote instantly recorded it would get them engaged. Hey it works for American Idol and other shows. The industry has figured out that you get more viewers when they have a choice to participate.

[Sonicmedusa]

5. What a great idea!

However, Americans would never find decisions that directly effect them nearly as enchanting as "Dancing with the Stars" or "American Idle".

The Networks would never carry it and we know the media is lock-stepping with the powers that be.

[Ugnmoose]

7. Mandatory coverage by networks

I think that as part of their license to serve the public interest the major networks would have to cover the debates on a rotating basis. Only one network would cover it at a time. And they would be allowed to have commerical breaks to pay for the time. I think advertisers would be interested in this as it would likely draw larger audiences, especially if people could interactively participate.

[IDemo]

6. That would lead to "DU this legislation" posts

and we don't want that.