Representative government requires the democratic process.

Democracy, in theory, results in an authority derived from the bottom up. All other theories of government sustain authority from the top-down.

Our two party system has entrenched itself between the voters and representative government. They are two top-down belief-based organizations, like churches, soliciting support from those who agree with their beliefs.

Political parties are the trolls at the bridge toward representative government, preventing our safe passage for their own gain. They are middlemen, profiting from our need for representation, and like insurance companies, prosper most when they serve the least.

Republicans and democrats have legislated their duopoly too big to fail, even though they did fail, and continues to fail, rendering our government an ongoing failure run by a two-party monopoly that rewards the establishment and exploits the public.

Elected officials must oblige to the top down party rules written and practiced by the political parties. Introducing bills, controlling debate, committee assignments, virtually all functions of government are controlled by two competing top-down authorities which results in a process where the majority is overruled.

The democratic process as outlined in the Constitution makes no mention of political parties. The Constitution provides for representation based on geography and population, not party affiliation.

That democratic process should now be expanded to consider each voter's level of income and allow voters to elect candidates from their own tax brackets. This could be achieved with a new apportionment act.

The government could be much more representative of the population with a new apportionment act as described in "Income-based Representation".

The intention of the Constitution is to provide a representative government of, by, and for the people, which requires the democratic process. Protecting and defending that process is the primary responsibility of government.

Government officials pledge to protect and defend the constitution in order to protect us from those, whether foreign or domestic, who would deny us democratic representation.

Government is not the problem. The problem is that the government is not representative of the public, financially.

Our government is occupied by private interest representatives working against democratic reforms that would benefit the public. They resist a more representative government for personal gain, incumbency, and party control. But, history shows if pressured enough, both parties will move, reluctantly, towards positive changes in public policy.

The major political parties that monopolize the path to public office are the obstruction to the necessary democratic reforms that could achieve a more representative government. The major parties have, intentionally or not, worked together against democratic reform.

The private parties pretend that they are not the government as they control every aspect of it. They need donations from the public to campaign, they say, because the public doesn't want to afford publicly financed elections. This practice results in politicians beholden to private interest money and a government by and for those who can afford it.

The results of the current private party policies are democratic decay and increased inequality, which leads to more conflict, regardless of which candidates win.

The electoral process needs a major national public investment act to implement a post-modern, state of the art, high-tech consensus system for the public to facilitate American democracy.

I believe party affiliation should be removed from the ballot entirely. This would help prevent partisan politics and require voters to understand the candidate's positions on issues.

It could be easy to vote for an issue with an issue based ballot, cross-referenced to a list of candidates who agree or disagree with the voter on their issues. You know it's coming sooner or later.

A representative government would have candidates endorse specific legislation and then if they are elected be obligated to vote their pledges. This would increase policy predictability and reduce hypocrisy by elected officials.

I also believe any partisan rules should be retired, and that private money should be banned from the electoral process completely, and the parties themselves be better regulated or phased out.

All elected officials should serve as non-partisans. Party affiliation should be restricted to a candidate's resume and/or biography with schools and employers.

Imagine concerns of voter ID to prevent people from casting an illegal vote that might effect election outcomes when so-called super-delegates can cast votes at the conventions that are equivalent to thousands of people voting.

The nation's allegiance should be to the democratic process and to freedom of speech, first and foremost, as is required by law, not to campaign contributors.

Unity of purpose is assumed and expected in the constitution, unlike the factionalism as practiced by the two opposing major political parties we have now.

A representative government needs to reflect the economic condition of the public. Because money is representation, representatives should be apportioned according to the public's income, not just geography and population.

We need to transition into a system like tax-bracket apportionment, or something similar, that recognizes the population's economic diversity in order to achieve a more representative government, economically.