How are cantons better than “representative” government?
Consider how a representative, whether Congressman or County Commissioner or Town Councilman, gets elected. All the eligible voters of the territory who still think that voting matters choose their candidate. The person who gets the most votes wins. Seems eminently fair, doesn’t it?
The problem is that all the people who voted for someone other than the winner are really not represented. The person elected represents the principles and ideals of the people who voted for him, but not necessarily those who did not.
For example, in one little town I know, the Town Council consists of 6 members, all of the same party. This is not unusual. In this particular town, this party has a slight majority, with the result that all the council members are voted in by a slight majority from the same party. The slight MINORITY has no representation. Seems eminently unfair, doesn’t it?
So, how would cantons change this? Instead of voting, taxpayers in a territory would register with their prefered canton. As each canton has a stated set of principles and ideals, it can be said with some certainty that the canton truly represents the taxpayer as well as can be expected. Since the relationship between a canton and a taxpayer is only for a single year, that provides a lot of feed-back to the canton management about how they are doing. The cantons would be very careful in spending their members’ taxes, knowing that, if the taxpayer chooses at the end of the year to switch cantons, there goes the money with him. A canton that mismanages, especially by not respecting the principles and ideals of its members, will soon find it has nothing to manage.