Friday March 14, 2008, 9:29 am
The pic I chose has this connection to the story submitted: with a system like that in Portland, Oregon, my favourite candidates would have a fair chance, the playing field would be more level, the people's choice would decisive - and a lot more people would care to vote for those they actually think are the best candidates - now too many don't bother to vote, they don't believe the elections are fair or that they change anything, thinking candidates are pre-selected - am I right?

Friday March 14, 2008, 12:41 pm
Sounds like they got it right!

Friday March 14, 2008, 1:19 pm
I think that's brilliant. One small step at a time...

Friday March 14, 2008, 3:49 pm
"Because in Voter Owned Elections, when you 'max out' as a donor with a simple $5 contribution, you get more for your money, not less. You get choices. You get hope. You get fairness. You may just get the democracy you deserve.
Things are different here. And that is a very good thing."
(Quote fr t article)

Saturday March 15, 2008, 9:40 am
Noted, thanks Doris.

Saturday March 15, 2008, 1:04 pm
Rock on Oregon!!!

Sunday March 16, 2008, 7:03 pm
Thanks Doris! Just saw Jim Hightower Friday night in West Hartford, Ct. He spoke about this concept and said it is taking over in the grassroots movement--where all good things happen and where all things are possible. Only difference is contributions could be from 5 to 100. per person.

Monday March 17, 2008, 5:22 pm
Thanks everybody for comments and notes! This ideas is a great discussion-point - it opens so many possibilities for improvements. And it already works in one place - so it's tried and true... :-)
Wishing everybody fair elections, why be satisfied with less?