I've been thinking a great deal on systems that would help enable direct democracy, something I feel is vital in our increasingly centralized and polarized political world. In my eyes, votes are the eyes of the country - they are the best way for a governmental system to understand the needs of its populace.
A lot of that has gotten lost in our representative republics, none of which are true democracies, which in the past have been too unwieldy to implement after the population reaches a certain point.
However, now we have the technology to enable direct democracy, pretty easily too. If we had a politician with the will and the right system to implement it, I could see it being revolutionary if it were copied on a wider scale.
Some caveats
The voting system is secure and only open to the politician's constituents
The voting system allows commentary with your vote
Votes are held for every piece of legislation
There would be a submission form for constituents to directly submit proposed legislation for review by the politician
Proposed legislation is published well ahead of the vote
The system provides an auditable paper trail, but personal anonymity in the detail of the results
Would love to get other folks opinions on this, both from a technical and political perspective.
No - because there's no need for politician then, is there?
Part of a good politician's job is to try an take the often conflicting demands of their consitutents, e.g "better services", "lower taxes", "no debt please" or "an end to global climate change - but no inconvenience for me please" and try to shape them into a consistent, workable set of policies. They should also try to lead to an extent - being a person who explains positions, trade-offs and up-coming unplreasant truths that the electorate need to think about.
Yes, this is an idealistic view - but politicians like that do exist.
A politician who simply says: "You want that? we'll do that" based on a never-ending series of referenda isn't much use it anyone.
save