Public: Government: Alternative Forms
Apathetic Representatives   (+4, -2)  [vote for, against]
Because not giving a shit is a legitimate political position.

There was a recent national election here and a rather unpopular political party won a majority government in the legislature. This phenomenon is largely caused by vote splitting and low voter turnouts. It is a common phenomenon which many have attempted to solve with alternative electoral systems.

A proportional representation system attempts to solve this, but seats are distributed to only the parties voted for. This solves the vote splitting problem, but not the low voter turnouts. To remedy this problem a new system of proportional representation should allot seats to apathetic representatives.

A typical election under this system for a house with three-hundred seats may have a voter turnout of fifty percent. As a result half of the seats would be given to apathetic representatives, and the rest to the parties as a proportion of their vote.

It has become evident that I've only thought this far along into the idea, and haven't decided the best way to select apathetic representatives from a pool. Until such a mechanism has been decided each of the seats will be occupied by a jar of bees with a loose fitting lid.
-- rcarty, May 14 2011

Wasps would be a better choice than bees.

What do the AR's do? Continually abstain?
-- 8th of 7, May 14 2011

Mostly abstain, but also be contrarians that refuse to let things pass, just because why do anything?
-- rcarty, May 14 2011

So you end up with all these grunting, aggressive primates, scratching themselves, crapping everwhere, and stuffing their faces at the taxpayer's expense.

It would be cruel to the gorillas to place them in an environment like that.
-- 8th of 7, May 14 2011

//It would be cruel to the gorillas to place them in an environment like that.//

Since when did the Borg do humour? Not bad, though.
-- MaxwellBuchanan, May 14 2011

By the way, nobody has voted for or agin this idea, aptly.
-- MaxwellBuchanan, May 14 2011

//What do the AR's do?// Perhaps fail to show up, thereby preventing a quorum.
-- mouseposture, May 14 2011

Apathetic representatives could be selected by lottery,by picking from among those lottery-winners now rich enough to afford an election run. You would just have to force the ones that don't want to do this to run for office.
-- briancady413, May 14 2011

Why force them to run for election? Simply force lottery winners to become MPs, congressmen, etc. If only people not busy otherwise earning a living have time to serve in the legislature, then the legislature becomes a bit unrepresentative. A solution is to make randomly selected people rich for life, and force them in exchange to do the hard jobs from which, notoriously, any applicant is, ipso facto, disqualified. The lottery aspect makes the scheme pay for itself. This could either be opt-in (only those who buy lottery tickets contribute and are eligible to win) or universal, via the Inland Revenue or IRS which would make it like National Service, but better remunerated.
-- mouseposture, May 14 2011

Pshaw! How can you be certain they are apathetic until you get at least one form letter back praising their VILE position in response to your sharply worded, yet respectful letter?

I take it you haven't collected many of those yet.
-- Zimmy, May 16 2011

I like this idea, but I won't vote on it.

How appropriate, though. A half-thought-out idea about half-interested politicians representing the half of the electorate that doesn't give half a rat's patootie!
-- Canuck, May 16 2011

You wouldn't have to force anyone to run for office. Just call people randomly and ask them whether they want to do it or not. Anybody who immediately says yes or no is rejected. Those who respond with "I dunno, maybe", "Uh, I guess so?" or even simply "Meh" are selected for an extensive background check to search for any past evidence of having ever had a point of view about anything that matters. Factors such as a prior run for political office, having voluntarily performed community service, or having written a letter to the editor are all taken into account when deciding whether or not the "candidate" truly could not give less of a shit one way or the other.
-- ytk, May 16 2011

From what I can tell our votes buy us nothing more than the right to complain about the bastards broken campaign promises anyway.

Voting for individuals is a monumental con job, (heavy on the mental).
Binding referendums and an earned right to vote would get people off their asses. Choosing the next puppet seems to change nothing for the better.
-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, May 16 2011

Eh, who cares?
-- ytk, May 17 2011

//an extensive background check to search for any past evidence of having ever had a point of view about anything that matters.// It's called voir dire.
-- mouseposture, May 17 2011


// //What do the AR's do?// Perhaps fail to show up, thereby preventing a quorum.//

Or you could make it a point that the AR's don't get paid unless they show up for work, unlike the MP's we usually end up with.
-- FlyingToaster, May 17 2011

random, halfbakery