Fixing Democracy: There Could Be An App For That

Democracy, as its currently understood, is an invention that is usually credited to the ancient Athenians over 2500 years ago. It’s original champion, Cleisthenes is said to have gained power but instead of becoming an absolute ruler as would’ve reasonably been expected, he instead chose to create the difficult and less traveled road: democracy.

Even at its best, our representative form of democracy is only an insufficient approximation of the true promise of democracy which I’d argue is more closely represented by direct democracy.

American Democracy has been subject to a special kind of pathology: the variety which cannot even be agreed upon by its observers. Literally everyone has a different prescription to fix our beleaguered democracy and our even more fraught national discourse.

The problem is that we don’t know what the problem is and even if we did, you, me, and whichever “I” is reading this is but one person. And even if we did somehow manage to identify the correct problem to solve and united some people in its pursuit, the political system is difficult to penetrate. This is not a bug but a feature of American Democracy.

Were the framers really that good?

Did they really construct something so airtight that a single person couldn’t make a difference? I think not.

To say that is almost to say that the framers had solved the Byzantine Generals problem. To say that is to say they invented the blockchain and probably even McAfee Antivirus.

What Are The Problems?

It’s important to understand how the “system works” if you’re going to set out to change it as a mere individual. Setting the issues straight by reasoning from first principals would help. Let us lay out some immutable laws of American Politics

1. Most people who run for office do so with the best of intentions
2. There is a nationwide phenomena where on average voters are more happy with the politician representing their home district than they are with representatives from the same body outside of the home district.
3. The dearth of key performance indicators for politicians makes it difficult to objectively evealute performance of politicians.
4. Citizens cede all decisions to candidates once elected.
5. Citizens have no effective way to recall politicians.
6. Disenchantment leads to low voter participation.
7. Closed primaries draw the most extreme elements out of each party.

A Potential Panacea

An individual could run for office on the premise of restoring direct democracy.

With 2018 technology it’s not difficult to imagine being a voter tech solution that cold facilitate this lofty goal. The candidate would either need to a.) have created an app prior to running or would need to b.) hire legislative aids who can build it once in office (how it’s possible to not need traditional legislative aids will be addressed later).

So, a candidate runs for office, let’s say for the Nebraska Unicameral Legislature, with the intent to restore direct democracy with the help of an app.

What would the app do?

The app could allow the state senator to push out votes to the electorate, effectively making every measure an initiative ballot for the citizens of that legislative district.

Addtionally, citizens could suggest

This sounds good but what are the downsides?

• If voters know that they can vote electronically regularly it may incentivize hacking and other deceptive cyber practices.
• It could be difficult to know if a voter actually lived in the district or not, especially if they were a registered user of the app but not a registered voter in the actual election.
• Voters who move out of the district during the term might still be able to vote while voters who move into the district after the term has begun may be denied of the chance to vote.
• Many voters who are lower on the socioeconomic rung aren’t as politically active and this system might make that effect even more pronounced.
• Many voters are uneducated about the minutiae of policies which is the very reason why we have represent democracy in the first place.
• Many voters do not have access to computers and smart phones so they cannot vote in this manner.
• Such a voting system would give a politician too much access to voter data.

The aforementioned concerns are very real and must be addressed point by point.

• The potential for voter fraud is a real concern under such a system but fortunately there are several possible ways to address this concern. Blockchain technology can go far in ensuring the integrity of virtual voting. A further compromise may need to be made which would log votes and allow users to access these votes. An exteme but extremely effective way to fight voter fraud would be to make the votes public.
• Apps like the NextDoor App and organizations like OPS have figured out methods of ensuring that customers/users actually live where they say they do. Such an app could look to those organizations for guidance. Also, cell phone location data could possibly be leveraged. It might be responsible to get voter input on how whatever is decided on and it might be best to let the electorate vote on this matter directly.
• A compromise would need to be struck on the topic of in/out migration by neighbors, perhaps this is something that the electorate could vote on at the beginning of each political term. This is a tough question that should be outsourced to the very people who should be the rightful arbiters of such matters.
• Low socioeconomic voters who already aren’t that politically engaged on average would get the short end of the stick. This is probably the most difficult concern to address. A solution could come in the form of an algorithm to adjust the votes but such a tactic might be dubious. Or, a cap could be put on the number of votes that can be counted from each demographic. Another possible solution is to require a quorum of each demographic in order to trigger tallying of the votes — this wouldn’t guarantee that participation was proportionally balanced but it would go a long way in enforcing a minimum of participation.
• Many voters and users of this app are unlikely to come to the table with intimate knowledge of each topic they’d be asked to vote on each day but this represents a great opportunity and not a threat. A simple write up about each topic followed by a multiple choice quiz (that you can take an unlimited number of times) could help solve this potential problem while making the electorate more knowledgeable with eaching passing day.
• It’s true that many voters do lack access to the technological resources to allow them to vote on a regular basis. Public library partnerships could help address this problem. Friends and family can also be instrumental in helping loved ones exercise voting opportunities. This remains an open question that needs to be answered.
• The first politician to create this method would likely have access to more voter data than would be ethical. Ideally, this app would live with a nonprofit that was open and transparent while upholding a data policy to the highest degree of ethics. This plan should be communicated to voters ahead of time and the final decision about ownership and use of the data should be agreed upon and made known prior to the app’s launch.

Let’s Recap What’s Been Discussed So Far:

An individual decides to run for Nebraska’s Unicameral and runs on the platform of restoring direct democracy. To be successful the candidate leverages technology to create an app that does just this. The app would seek to minimize the common concerns raised when utilizing technology for voting. As we mentioned, the app would likely be made after the candidate was elected by hiring web developers as legilsative staff.

How Will The Elected Official Manage Without Traditional Legislative Aids?

The state senator wouldn’t need as many legislative aids if he/she isn’t responsible for casting votes on behalf of the people any longer. The state senator will still need to conduct research but one thing will not be necessary any longer: meetings with lobbyists. From a lobbying standpoint this state senator is useless. He/she cannot be bought without buying the entire legislative district.

What Might A State Senator Do With All This New-found Free Time?

Now that the job of governing has basically been automated and delegated to the rightful owners of that duty: the electorate, the elected official can focus on addressing some of the foundational problems with government. As we can see, the politician would be a free man, unbought by anyone and unencumbered by the typical rules. The official could introduce bills that entertain questions such as:

1. What would it look like if there weren’t closed primaries?
2. Would it be possible to move towards a proportional representation scheme?
3. What other rule changes can be made to improve the political process?

What Else Should The Politician Do?

Wouldn’t it be great if the politician was able to be recalled by popular vote at any time? This system could provide such a possibility. How would a politician differently behave if he knew that his job was on the line every day and not just every four years? Theoretically, this should eradicate the proclivity for short-termism since there will now be no difference between an election year and a regular day since voters are able to cast ballots freely at both points.

There could be a problem with candidates who run with such a system to seize power and to stay in power indefinitely. Maybe this isn’t inherently bad, but maybe it is. A politician could agree that he/she will not seek office again if their general election competition is also using the app system.

All of these elective clauses could be made legally binding once the candidate gets in office and this could forge the beginning of a new, unadultered social contract.

What Might This Plan Cause Other Politicians To Do?

It could happen that this program might force other politicians to adopt it too if they want to be successful. If any sizeable portion of elected members were able to automate and outsource the democratic process to the electorate it could open up untold possiblities to work together on high level rule changes that are the most responsible for the outcomes of our democratic process.

There are almost certainly other positive unintended consequence tha would result if politicians didn’t have to act in such a short term and politically motivated manner.

Visioning

What might an America look like with a more informed and active citizenry who has actual agency? What might get done when the incentive structures that support gridlock, short termism, and partisanism get dismantled and come crashing down?

It might only take one. One person who decides to become one candidate who the voters decide to make one elected official.