in my first month, i'd make all businesses stay open 24-7.

just think of the benefits.

you could always get whatever you need regardless of the time of day or day of the week.

there would be more jobs available

there would be less crowding in malls and grocery stores

less traffic

i could continue

Beestie's new rule: Only registered voters can contribute to campaigns and not more than $1,000 per voter. Corporations and PACS are prohibited from participating in the electoral process. This rule is retroactive which may involve backtracking on some under-the-table deals that Bush and Kerry have already made.

It all starts with the lawmakers.


Next in the crosshairs: Lobbyists.
After that: Trial lawyers.

It is good to be King! :)

Yeah seriously, *a lot* needs to be done to improve the election system.

January: Mandatory, everyone must vote. Everyone has to file taxes every stinking year. Why not mandate that everyone must vote? Turkey (the nation) already has a similar law on the books. When a cantidate is elected, you know (s)he earned it.

Sub-item: Enable online elections. Make it easy to vote.

February: Roll-over election numbers. If there are more than 2 cantidates, voters have the option to "rank" the cantidates... 100% of their vote goes to their #1 pick. If that cantidate isn't one of the top contenders, then 100% of their vote goes to the #2 pick, etc etc.

And yeah, contribution reform and lobbyist reform would be pretty high up on the schedule as well.

I didn't say I'd do it... I said I'd magnanimously delegate the authority to the directors of IT :cool:

Well, as the King, you'd be more or less assured that you wouldn't get stuck working third shift!!

unless i wanted to

the whole reason third shift sucks is that all your friends and fam. are working while you sleep and vice versa.

So people with an IQ of 47 will be required to vote?

How about the folks in one of Wolfs lockups?

Man, I have trouble with that. Any other electronic dohickey that can't be recounted and checked, also. Too easy to defraud the public. :(

Online elections....Not ready for prime time.

Do not tempt these people.

Hey! First off, yes, if you have an IQ of 47, if you're an American citizen then you have the right the vote... and I *want* you to vote. Pull that lever, and be proud. The benefits of having EVERYONE vote far outweigh the downsides of having a president serve in office where less than 50% of the total population voted... and of THOSE, only 45% voted for the "winner".

And next, just because there are some problems with the current online voting system doesn't mean we should shun it! Fix the problems, fix accountability, fix auditing of the system, and just do it!

What was it, Wisconsin? Montana? (can't remember) that had Dem primary voting enabled online. It is possible, it can be done, but it takes a whole heck of a lot of planning to implement it properly. I don't care if you have to route it through 3 dozen clearinghouses to make it official, there *is* a way. If I can log on and transfer money to netflix for a couple DVDs, then dogonit, I should be securely able to vote for the next governor of Durham, NC.

*spits tobakee off his porch*

Now git yer yankee arse off er me propertee!

I consider any law system for which high school students could not memorize and understand all of the law* in one semester to be flawed.

Contrary to what I just said, I would impose taxes (or tax scalars) for corporations based upon polluting. The first target would be PCBs.

[Edit: I had said: for corporations, but that would be too easy to dodge. Craft the law to target things dumped by corporations, and don't say 'corporations' specifically.]

*Maybe 'all applicable law', but that might be getting into dangerous territory.

I hereby decree
 

that the Second Amendment to the Constitution shall be reworded to read:

"In order that the people shall be secure in their person and effects, The Right of the people to keep and carry small arms and such ammunition as may be necessary, shall not be infringed, save for that such a Right be reserved to adults who have shown competency in such a firearm to a qualified instructor."

There, I think that covers it. No more permits, no more gun bans, no more ammunition restrictions. Just a simple demonstration to any qualified instructor that one is competent in the firearm they choose to carry; be that a revolver or a submachine gun. Dammit, if I feel that an MP-5A is the right tool to defend me and mine from the forces of evil out there, then who is the government to say I cannot? And I want more law to be written to more clearly define "competency", "adult", "infringed" (since they can't seem to figure it out NOW), "small arms" (must be able to be carried and used by a single person, no crew-served weapons, no howitzers, no nuclear bombs), and something needs to be written to require that a person be responsible for his use or misuse of that firearm. If one chooses to carry a sawed-off shotgun and uses it to kill six gangbangers and one innocent bystander, then one is responsible for that innocent bystander. I'll leave it to the lawyers to iron out the details.

Brian

In February, I shall Decree
 

that all laws must have a "sunset Provision" written into them (Amendments to the Constitution are exempt), which shall be no longer than five years.

Now that the Legislature must vote to renew all laws every five years or so, they will reach a critical mass of law where they cannot find the time to pass more because they are reexamining the old ones. This can also save us from having outdated laws sitting around.

For example, in Ambler, Penna, it is technically illegal to kiss in public.
This is silly and should be repealed, but it still sits there. Not enforced or anything, but IMO, if a law is not enforced, then it is useless and either needs to be repealed or, if it is still useful to society, then the law enforcement authorities need to have their butts kicked.

I hate it when I see silly laws from two hundred years ago still on the books for no discernable reason. Legal journals run stories now and then listing the silly laws they have found that are still on the books. Examples such as laws that regulate how an automobile and a horse may meet and pass one another, Victorian "decency" laws and others that are quaint, out-of-date and no longer useful to society. We look upon these as merely humorous but why for Pete's sake do we not then remove these laws? This would decrease the overall burden on citizens and reduce the need for lawyers.

Brian

You'd make every place like Los Angeles?

My first amendment will be, Congress shall make no law.