Well, I agree that such an improvement in the quality of the voters would solve the problem.
But that does not explain why, when the existing voters do the right thing, that nothing changes. Let's pick abolishing the Department of Education as an example.
I choose that because the Department of Education is new, it's conspicuously useless and wasteful, and it does not educate a single child.
More importantly HUGE ELECTORAL MAJORITIES have voted TWICE - in 1984, and again in 1994, for candidates sworn to its abolition.
The nature of the GOP 1994 revolution was so amazing, and I think, because of our disappointments recently, we don't think about it in the right way.
The Democrats were swept from power in a popular avalanche. The Republicans had over 230 House members. 54 Democrats were tossed out. Most importantly, the incoming majority had SIGNED A PLEDGE to abolish the Department of Education.
So, my question is, why is it still in existence?
Yes, the Democrats are corrupt and beholden to teacher unions. Yes, too many people vote, and too many are enfranchised.
BUT THIS DOES NOT EXPLAIN THE SURVIVAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
This small slice of a much bigger pie suggests that the People cannot change the growth of government, EVEN BY WINNING ELECTIONS WITH A CLEAR MANDATE.
If electing conservatives to the majority and giving them clear instructions is insufficient, then the whole voting thing isn't going to work, ever, and we need to look elsewhere for positive change.
For some reason people seem to be certain that abolition of the Department of Education was part of the Contract With America. It wasn't.
all these people collecting and then throw in the people presently working for the govt and you can see that cutting govt is never going to happen unless some catastrophic event takes place and the federal govt is forced to cut severely...
I always thought the GOP 1994 revolution was due to the corruption in the Dem Party - mainly the scandal involving the congressional bank mess.