I know this will rankle some...

So if we can't get 85% of eligible voters to cast votes based on informed, qualified opinions, how else can we achieve a more knowledgeable level of ballot-casting? If there's too much entrenched apathy to get past, if the majority of votes are based on 'name recognition', how else might we make things better?

Well, in Nevil Shute's novel 'In The Wet', the notion of a 'graduated vote entitlement' is posited. Everyone starts off with one vote. But from there, you're afforded additional votes according to- Well, here's the list:

1) Reaching the age of eighteen

2) Higher education or gaining a commission in the armed forces

3) Earning one's living overseas for two years

4) Raising two children to the age of 14 without divorcing

5) Being an official of a church

6) Having a high earned income

7) By Royal Charter at the Queen's (government's) discretion

Personally, I'd make some minor adjustments here. I'd say the age requirement for #4 should be 16, I'd find an assortment of non-religious institutions for #5, I'd address #6 more reasonbly...and have #7 be a little less flashy.

But to me the basis of the notion is sound; within an environment where possessing the right to vote is cherished, those who have more experience, more perspective and by extension (hopefully) more wisdom should have more of a say in the execution of our governance.

Because Lord knows that right now, 60% of us don't really give a good God-damn about the value of suffrage, so maybe we need to find a way to change this. Make the process more one of acquisition.

After all; isn't that at the core of this materialistic, consumer-based society of ours...?