Real election reform ideas

This is a very strange election cycle. I think a lot of people are floating ideas ahead of the 2012 presidential election that will be mind-blowing and head-spinning. 2012 may see the electorate perhaps as divided than we were during the American Civil War. I fear some may even take to arms to settle disputes of ideas.

We need to stop this trend of stoking up the people to anger just so 535 men and women can either stay in power or gain power. With the current state of the media competing with Lady GaGa, The Jersey Shore and the Housewives instead of rational thought, I don’t see a change in the trajectory. I really hope I’m wrong.

In the hope that reasonable people are reading and are also as nervous as I am with the mood of this country, I offer two options for some election reform.

For every day or portion of the day an incumbent is campaigning, they may not draw a salary or benefits from their elected positions
These people are interviewing for a job they hope to keep. The taxpayers paying them is like me demanding a day’s wages from a prospective employer for interviewing with them for a job I need to convince them I am qualified for. If they don’t get paid for campaigning, maybe the campaign season will be shorter and the actual work we elected them to do will be done more in earnest.

The only TV ads that are allowed are one where the actual candidate is speaking into the camera in his or her own words.
All other ads can be run, but they MUST carry a huge disclaimer throughout the entire broadcast of the ad that says “This is an opinion only. Facts have not been independently verified.” Even if the ad contains facts, unless the candidate is facing the camera and willing to put his/her words on the recorded record, it should be labeled opinion. Free speech means you can say what you want, but you can’t make up your own facts.

These are just a couple ideas from one of the unwashed, fading middle class voters out here in Pro-America who is getting very tired of the rancor, hate and anger but knows that to ignore it would be more dangerous to liberty than getting more involved.