It's always comforting to know that you're not all alone on radical proposals for electoral reform.
Take political parties. I wrote a post about getting rid of them last January:
"So why don't we de-politicize state government, especially the state legislature, by making it entirely non-partisan? I can think of little of substance that the legislature has accomplished in the last few sessions. Why? Electoral partisan gridlock, pure and simple. If the D's are for it, the R's are against it. And vice versa. It's all about power, not policy."
So today I read on the front page of the Oregonian the same recommendation from an official "panel" charged with solving the problem of "partisan gridlock".
The vote was 18-2, with ten members not in attendance. But even if all ten missing officials had voted "nay", the vote would still have resulted in a super-majority in favor of de-politicizing state politics.
Was the "panel" representative of the people of Oregon? I don't know. But it had to be more representative of the views of the rank and file than my lone voice.
Who says there's no good news in the daily paper?