2024 Post-U.S. Presidential Election Statement
December 11, 2024
December 11, 2024
|
"My name is Kevin Lewis, and I’m a Co-Founder and member of The Altruist Party. Today we’ll be presenting a review of the post-2024 U.S. Presidential election and adding new materials to our website. On the site, you can search for any topic that interests you. We’ll also go deeper into subjects and ideas we’ve proposed, give a recap of The Altruist Party, and provide guidance on upcoming presentations.
To start off, I really like this quote: ‘Disagreement is why democracy exists.’ I’m not sure who originally said it—I’ve seen it in a few different places. As you’ve seen in past presentations, we’ve emphasized that war is not inevitable for our species, and there are better ways to settle disagreements—especially in times of bipartisan friction. Democracy, so far, is the best way we’ve developed to resolve conflict, and at The Altruist Party we are strong proponents of democracy—and of upgrading democracy, as you’ll see in this presentation." |
|
"First, I'm going to answer some initial questions sent to us via social media or our website. Anyone can send us questions from several different avenues. We initially started off on Twitter/X and now we're in the process of migrating to Bluesky.
Why do you present and campaign the way you do?
Why does The Altruist Party not accept donations?
How can I help promote The Altruist Party?
Are you going to run as a candidate again?
Are you a vampire?
|
|
"What we’ll go through today will be a re-intro to The Altruist Party. We’ll walk through the website quickly, talk about what altruism is, etc. All of this information, including this video documentation, will be put online and dictated. This shows you the general flow of what we’ll talk about today. Once we’ve gone through a re-intro, we’ll talk about upgrading democracy and where that comes into play, such as upgrading the voting process and improving our rankings on the global Democracy Index. The People’s Vote is also something that we’ll dive into a bit more. We’ve received a lot of questions on biometric mobile voting, and we’ll cover that in more detail today.
To go through the website quickly: altruistparty.org is where you can find us. You can search for whatever topics you’re interested in and see what we have to say. On our homepage, you can see quotes that are evidence-based or research-based reasoning toward altruism. The About Us page is probably the most comprehensive view of what we stand for and the perspective we come from. We’ve been doing this since we were established back in 2012. You can also see ways you can help, and if you’re interested in writing us in, you can write in whoever the candidate’s name is, or simply write The Altruist Party. The main thing to understand is that we are a free, international, living constitutional party. In the United States, we live in a Constitutional Republic. So, by saying we are a living constitutional party, we mean that we believe the Constitution is a living document—it’s not etched in stone—and that there should and must be upgrades to the Constitution, such as the amendments we describe on the About Us page. We’re advocating biometric mobile voting, which you’ll see in more detail today. Open governance is another concept we support—greater government transparency and stronger public-private partnerships. We see many third-party government watchdogs that should be heard more and help audit government functions for effectiveness. Efficiency should be considered, yes, but effectiveness should also be prioritized. As for the amendments, the main thing is that basic mobile connectivity is a human right. That’s what sets us apart, first and foremost, from any other political party in the world: we are promoting basic connectivity not for entertainment purposes, but to receive vital alerts—weather, hazards, medication recalls, etc.—anything that would help all citizens and ensure people don’t feel left behind if they lack mobile connectivity. We’re also looking at multimodal, biometric-secured mobile voting. We’ll talk about what that looks like in more detail. We are a political party that wants to make sure every person is heard—that every individual feels they are heard and can channel their communication about whatever they’re interested in to their government, whether at the federal/national, regional, state, or local community level. Their voice should be counted, and there should be tangible acknowledgment. We’ll also talk about this in terms of how it can help break government gridlock. There are plenty of topics where you see the public wants certain things to happen, but there’s gridlock. We feel that what we call The People’s Vote—tapping into public sentiment—should help break that gridlock so we can have a more functional government, move forward, and upgrade as needed as a country. Regarding the 51% approval rating for all government officials and the 90-day recall election, this is mainly aimed at so-called representatives in government who are not representing the people. If an elected official has a majority of their constituents believing they’re not doing an adequate job, then they could be voted out of office—not waiting until the next election, but removed through a recall, such as a 90-day recall election, which you already see in some states today. The last thing we’ll talk about, which may be in the next presentation, is the option of receiving vital information through mobile technology as a human right. You can see examples of the types of guidance and information that would be provided on our About Us page. The other pages of the website show you what we’re monitoring, with links to our posts, campaigns, statements, a volunteer pledge, the Hall of Altruism—which highlights altruists throughout history and today—as well as a way to contact us." |
|
"In terms of what we’ve talked about in the past, you can see this on the Campaigns and Statements pages of our website. Most of the topics you see there are ones we’ve already discussed and will cover in more detail today."
|
|
"The first thing is: what is altruism? Why altruism? The origin of the concept came from a dream when I was living in Chicago—that’s where The Altruist Party was born. In the dream, I was walking by a bus stop and saw one of my cousins wearing a t-shirt that simply said ‘Altruist’ on the front. As I was thinking about what to name the party, altruism and The Altruist Party really resonated and synchronized with the overall concept of what we’re trying to talk about: people cooperating with each other to make the world a better place, to make life better for their children, listening to each other, showing concern for one another, and listening to everybody tangibly—so that we can literally build toward our future and move forward. Not just with the challenges of climate change, but also with the division and conflict we’ve seen over the past few elections.
"This is a quote from someone who studies altruism, and I think it really stands out in the way we evolved as a species. When you look at species and groups dominated by narcissistic individuals, they didn’t do as well or survive like the groups of altruistic individuals did. I especially like this last statement: ‘Altruism is what made us human.’" |
|
"You see different examples of altruism. We’ve had a lot of floods, and in this particular picture you can see animals being helped, children being helped, people of different ethnicities—everybody chipping in to try to help out.
Text: Altruism is the belief or practice of selfless concern for the well–being of others. While it may seem contradictory at first glance, altruism is not inherently self–contradictory because it is based on the idea that individuals can derive satisfaction or fulfillment from helping others. In other words, acting selflessly can bring about personal happiness or a sense of purpose. Additionally, altruism is often rooted in empathy, compassion, and the recognition of our interconnectedness as social beings. By helping others, we contribute to the well–being of our communities and promote mutual support. You see altruism and community support emerge most clearly when natural disasters happen. I call these heroic acts, but they’re not one-in-a-million acts." |
|
"Hopefully, as you go through life, you see different acts of altruism where someone clearly needed help—such as this case, where a gentleman uncovered himself and covered a person in a wheelchair. Acts of altruism happen all over the world."
|
|
"Here is another example of altruism: an athlete on the opposing team helped a kid who was cramping up. For the one helping, there was no benefit—he simply reacted by doing the right thing to help a friend, or someone who was clearly in pain."
|
|
"Here are more examples of altruism: a gentleman who couldn’t swim dove in after two kids and died saving them. He knew he couldn’t swim, but he went into the water anyway. That’s a perfect example of altruism.
There is another example of someone who saw a person in need of a wheelchair dragging herself across the street—and now they’ve given away over one million wheelchairs for free. This gentleman, during a clash where white supremacists were attacking people of color, saw one of the white supremacists being beaten up. He stepped in and saved the man from being kicked to death. When asked why he did it, he said, ‘It was just the right thing to do.’ There are countless examples of altruism. But the essence is this: if you see somebody who needs help and they’re at a disadvantage, and you step in to help them—that’s what altruists do." |
|
"Altruism is something that has been found to be universal—and often more frequent than people imagine. Studies show that altruistic acts happen approximately every two minutes. I’ve also read research suggesting that if everyone spent just 3% or less of their day acting with kindness, it would create positive ripple effects all over the world. That’s all it takes to make a difference—just 3% of your day doing something altruistic or helpful.
You also see kids being altruistic. They’re not benefiting from it or treating helping as a transaction, such as, ‘If I help you do X, then you have to do Y for me.’" |
|
"Babies will act altruistically as well. In other presentations we’ve shared, you can see our primate cousins (bonobos) giving food to non-family members. Altruism is part of our raw biological and evolutionary upbringing and being—which is also another reason why we chose The Altruist Party as a name."
|
|
"Studies also show that adults tend to display more altruism as they get older. The brain evolves to become more altruistic, typically, as we age—rather than more selfish or narcissistic.
You also see older adults volunteering more, not just because they have extra time in retirement, but because they feel better when they volunteer and want to give back." |
|
"There are sometimes comparisons between altruism and socialism, and ‘socialism’ is often treated as a bad word because of what happened with the Nazis in Germany. There is some irony in the way socialism is talked about. In this case, you have a Congressman speaking to a Big Oil executive, saying Congress shouldn’t be giving government handouts…while in the background, a parent in the window needs subsidized child care. The irony in this comic is that Congress is giving Big Oil government handouts and subsidies, but not providing support to citizens who also need help."
|
|
"Ultimately, what you see is that anything that helps the average American citizen gets labeled as communism, socialism, or Marxism—while anything that helps the 1% or corporate elites gets called capitalism. That’s the hypocrisy: people complain that socialism takes tax revenue and sends it to people or entities who don’t deserve it, yet Big Oil entities get away with massive subsidies, while people who need child care, first-time home purchases, or first-time business ownership receive little to nothing in comparison to what Big Oil, Big Tech, and other 1% entities get."
|
|
"For anyone saying socialism or altruism is bad, these are the democratic socialist programs that are active in the United States today."
|
|
"I remember after doing a presentation in Chicago, a gentleman came up to me on the sidewalk and said, ‘I think altruism is socialism.’ I wanted to tell him, ‘Well, the roads you drove here on are paid for by public funding. The sidewalk you’re standing on is paid for by public funding. Your VA or GI Bill, your Medicare—those programs that pay for your healthcare—are paid for by public funding. If you want to say that’s socialist, then you are tapping into socialism. You are literally standing on a road or sidewalk that is paid for by a democratic socialist program.’
But I didn’t say these things to him. Instead, I just said, ‘I appreciate your opinion. Everyone has an opinion. The main thing is that they are heard.’ Even this person, who is taking advantage of socialism in all these different ways, deserves to be heard, no matter what their voice is. They’re American, and we should make sure they are heard and counted in government public sentiment records, and in The People’s Vote—which we’ll talk about in a bit—regardless of whether or not we disagree." |
|
"Abraham Lincoln had a great quote about public sentiment. If you were to define what The Altruist Party is most interested in, it’s accurate public sentiment. For instance, polls in 2024 are still not accurate, and there’s this back-and-forth guessing game about what public sentiment really is. Let’s eliminate that and build an accurate view of public opinion.
Even in Lincoln’s time, he said: ‘Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed.’ We need to dive in and truly understand accurate public sentiment." |
|
"That also aligns with the fact that people protest and believe that protests work…but they don’t. If you look at protests throughout history and around the world, many end up being pacified, with little to no new laws or legislation passed. Too often, protests simply become an obstruction to the economy—people taking time off work and going into the streets to feel like they are being heard…yet they still are not being heard.
As The Altruist Party, one of our fundamental objectives is to bring ideas to people—and to the world at large—on how to resolve this problem of protests not being heard. The goal is to avoid situations where people in positions of power, like the person standing in the window in this image, simply look down at the protest, shrug their shoulders, and do nothing at all." |
|
"This is a picture of the Hong Kong protests, and one of the reasons I think I like this picture is that you can see how many people have cellphones. Also, notice where they’re standing—in the highway or roadway. The entire city is shut down. It’s fascinating and inspiring, but I don’t think it should be necessary for all of these people and an entire city shutting down to be what it takes to be heard and acknowledged by the government and their representatives in a way that ensures accountability. If these constituents are not being heard, their elected officials need to go—so that this doesn’t happen.
And if you pay attention to all of these people with cellphones, this is a good example of why we believe, as a party, that upgrading democracy with technology is something we are ready for. We’re at the stage where we can actually do it, and I’ll talk more about that later." |
|
This is a reminder of what The Altruist Party objectives are, what we stand for, and what we're looking at in terms of amendments to the Constitution.
|
|
"Upgrading democracy is something I’m very passionate about. As you’ll see, it involves biometric mobile voting with a paper trail—something that, to my knowledge, has never really been discussed in the world of politics or voting."
|
|
"In terms of global competitiveness in democracy, I like to look at somewhat agnostic sources such as the Economist Intelligence Unit 'Democracy Index', which ranks all the democracies in the world annually based on different categories:
We will look at what each of these means. These are the areas that, as a country and as a democratic Constitutional Republic, we really want to examine: How are we comparing competitively across the world in these different areas? What is going well? What’s not? What could we learn from other countries that could potentially be applied? And how could we innovate internally to help us become more of a full democracy—and, at the very least, practice what we preach in the U.S.?" |
|
"Today, only 8% of the world’s population lives in a full democracy. You can see the categories on the left-hand side. In the U.S., we are considered a flawed democracy, while Canada is considered more of a full democracy. You can also see the red and pink areas, which represent more authoritarian systems."
|
|
"You can see here that the U.S. is currently ranked 29th in the world in terms of the strength of democracy. One of the goals of The Altruist Party is to rise to #1—or at least into the Top 5.
You can also see how our scores have changed over the years. So what we’re asking is: how do we become more competitive on a global scale when it comes to democracy?" |
|
"One of the categories is having a free, fair, and transparent election process. In the U.S., there has been ongoing discussion about rigged elections, voter suppression, and related issues. Some of these occurrences are real, and some are not."
|
|
"We want to point out that, in terms of monitoring free, fair, and transparent elections, there are organizations that examine key questions: Are the elections free? Are they fair? Are they transparent? Oversight happens all the way down to the local level—NGOs, third-party watchdogs, local media, counties, and more. Everybody is watching. This is very important to all U.S. voters, and I really want to give credit to these organizations. None of what I’m talking about today would replace this process—it would actually build on the current process and make it even better and more secure. These groups, along with third-party watchdogs, could also help monitor public sentiment.
So, nothing I’m talking about today involves blowing things up and rebuilding brick by brick. It’s about integrating into the current workflow and, hopefully, tapping into what can make these organizations stronger, more efficient, and more effective." |
|
"In the U.S., there is not currently a single, national Independent Electoral Commission."
|
|
"You can see here that Independent Electoral Commissions are starting to emerge at the state level. In this case, the Independent Electoral Commission process is decentralized. We believe this could be both centralized (national) and decentralized (state-level) at the same time—or structured so that state-level commissions feed into one centralized, national Independent Electoral Commission. All of these ideas are open for discussion. The main point is that these organizations are starting to surface, and voters should not be afraid that no one is on point watching safeguards against voter fraud, interference or rigged elections, etc.
|
|
"We want to develop, in terms of global competitiveness, the absolute best safeguards, independent review processes, voter accuracy, and public sentiment accuracy—matching the highest levels you see around the world. That is the goal of The Altruist Party, particularly in the United States.
To re-emphasize: safeguards against voter fraud, interference, and rigged elections are being monitored at multiple levels by different entities. The goal is to put an end to conversations about rigged elections and ensure that people can trust their voices are heard—verified and validated." |
|
"When you look at this Gallup poll of different party group concerns, which goes up through 2024, you can see who is worried about ineligible people voting—for instance, claims of illegal immigrants voting in the millions. Who is worried about that, and who is not?
In this case, you don’t see many Democrats concerned, while more Republicans are, and Independents fall somewhere in between. So what we’re asking is: How do we solve this problem so that concern about ineligible people voting drops to less than 10%? That’s something we’re focusing on as a party." |
|
"One thing that can help bring innovation to this problem is increasing political pluralism, so there are more ideas to help resolve issues. What is pluralism as a political philosophy?
Pluralism as a political philosophy is the diversity within a political body, which allows for the peaceful coexistence of different interests, convictions, and lifestyles. It’s basically about multiple political parties being able to participate—not just the red team or the blue team. We want to make sure there are plenty of parties. This is not just about The Altruist Party, but about fair and equal treatment for all parties and all ideas. May the best ideas win—not just the richest parties or the people with the most money. Let’s try to evolve and progress with the ideas that are most effective and efficient. Increasing pluralism helps ensure everyone feels represented—our different lifestyles, our backgrounds. We’re a rich tapestry here in America, and we want to make sure everyone is represented." |
|
"Lack of pluralism in the United States—it's pretty much the red team or the blue team."
|
|
"This is what it would look like every year if you viewed the lack of pluralism from a sports perspective."
|
|
"We’re not looking at this from a two-party perspective. We want to move beyond this old-school way of thinking."
|
|
"Let's open the gates to all of these different parties and different ideas, and have an equal shot just like the red team and blue team do today.
|
|
"Even George Washington saw the risks of a partisanship in a two-party only system:
[Partisanship] serves always to distract the Public Councils and enfeeble the Public administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection… [Parties] are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People, and to usurp for themselves the reins of Government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion. Ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection, cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men...these are all things that we're seeing today...that are able to undermine the government and the people. George Washington and the Founding Fathers did not want a two-party only system, they clearly saw the risks back in 1793." |
|
"You can see in this Gallup poll, which goes up to 2024, that the desire for another political party is increasing. It was higher in 2022, but you can clearly see the split between the minority who believe in a two-party-only system versus the majority who want more pluralism.
I would counter the belief that the two-party-only system is doing an adequate job with data showing whether people believe the country is going in the right direction. The evidence shows that confidence in the country heading in the right direction is in the tank. So you can see that a majority of Americans want a third major political party—or even multiple parties. Very few successful, industrialized, first-world countries have just a two-party system. Most have a wide range of different political parties, with new names emerging all the time overseas. We believe that in order to be competitive and to improve our Democracy Index rankings, the U.S. needs to create space for other parties and ensure they are treated equally and fairly." |
|
"There are good reasons for Americans to want more major parties. It's hard for two parties to capture the diversity of views in a nation of more than 300 million people--now, 335 million people."
|
|
"If you look at the desire for a third party among registered Independents, Democrats, and Republicans, you can see that Independents strongly want third parties and do not feel represented or heard by the two-party-only system.
Even within the two major parties, you can see that interest in third parties is increasing as well. What we’re likely seeing today is a fracturing or rift within the two major parties—for example, far-right versus moderate Republicans, and far-left versus moderate Democrats. The question is: how do we break this two-party-only control?" |
|
"Just pointing out the lack of equal treatment for third parties today. 'Parties run the show: There's another factor working against third-party success: State legislatures make the rules about how candidates and parties get on the ballot, and state legislatures are made up almost exclusively of Republicans and Democrats. They have no desire to increase their competition.
So a minor-party candidate typically needs many more signatures on a petition to get on the ballot than major-party candidates do, and often also pays a filing fee that major party candidates don't necessarily have to pay.' For example, when I was in Chicago and ran as a write-in candidate for Mayor, it would have taken me, as an Independent, 25,000 signatures to get on the ballot. On the other hand, if I had been part of one of the major parties, it would have only taken 5,000 signatures. One of the third parties collected hundreds of thousands of signatures, but the officials controlling ballot access cherry-picked a small sample and found minor technical errors with the majority. As a result, they rejected so many signatures that the party was unable to get on the ballot. We’re trying to break through this. It is an open obstruction to people who have tried to run. And if you want to talk about something being 'rigged,' it’s obvious the rules are rigged against third-party candidates even being allowed to appear on the ballot." |
|
"When we look at the functioning of government, we see the duopoly—the red team versus the blue team—and we see the need for third parties starting to bubble up.
These are all recent headlines: ‘Congress limps,’ ‘Least productive Congress,’ ‘Worst Congress,’ and so on. Why is this happening? I believe the gridlock stems from the old red team–blue team system, where divisiveness has become so harsh and heavy that it has caused a complete stoppage in the functioning of our government. In the U.S., our government is not nimble because of these reasons." |
|
"The result of the two-party only system is a tug-of-war."
|
|
"When you look at Congressional approval ratings—and this ties into what I was countering against those who believe the two-party system is doing an adequate job—you can see that virtually everyone disapproves of our current government.
In 2024, only 16% of American citizens approved of the job Congress was doing." |
|
"This goes back to making sure that the people who are elected are representing their constituents—not themselves.
'Sociopaths make up just 1 to 4 percent of the overall population but take up 20 percent of leadership positions, according to one study. In other words, if we preferentially vote criminal personalities into office, then we have a system that increasingly governs with 'alternative' principles that squander and destroy rather than produce and create. The media outlets are a part of these larger societal trends, not a ballast against them. Their presentation of problems as entertainment keeps within the good graces of power structures and funding sources, but real problems requiring real solutions are inconvenient.' What studies and research show is that extreme narcissists, sociopaths, and psychopaths—people who will step on others’ throats—make up only about 4% of the population, yet they occupy 1 in 5 leadership positions. This is also true in government. That’s where you see a lack of representation, with people acting in their own interests, such as corporate interests, rather than representing their constituents. Leaders with low Congressional approval ratings should be subject to recall elections. This is where public sentiment comes in. A 16% approval rating should be acknowledged by leaders who are clearly not interested in raising Congressional approval with We the People. The question is: how do we change that?" |
|
"You can see from this graph that Americans’ satisfaction with the way things are going in the U.S. has been declining since the 1970s. Today, approximately 75% of Americans are not satisfied with the direction of the country."
|
|
"You can see here the public's trust in government at near lows, and how that's changed based on the presidency."
|
|
"What happens when you have a duopoly is that you basically end up with only two choices. And as you can see from this graph, no matter which party is in charge—the red team or the blue team—dissatisfaction levels among Americans with the way the government is going remain essentially flat, regardless of who is president.
'So you have two parties, two approaches — one which says, 'Yeah, we’ve got to burn this system down,' which, in rhetoric, is appealing. But when they hear, 'I can’t get an abortion,' it isn’t anymore... And then you have the party that is saying, 'We will defeat Trumpism,' telling you that they’re doing it to protect those institutions and that way of life that you have lost your patience with, that you’ve lost your support for. And that’s what this is about — and why it keeps going back and forth between who not-loses elections — because [the parties are] not putting on the political menu what people want to buy.' |
|
"In the last portion of this presentation, we’re going to focus on increasing political participation, which will help improve our global Democracy Index ranking."
|
|
"In terms of political participation, this picture looks great—there are a ton of people out there voting. But is this long line really necessary in 2024, when we could vote more conveniently without having to stand in line? You see all sorts of people with their cellphones out, looking at them—so why not tap into something everyone is already using and use that to upgrade the political participation process?
Currently, voter turnout is typically around 60%. Why isn’t it 80%? As a party, that’s where we would love to see voter turnout—not just for elections, but also for measuring public sentiment." |
|
"You can see that in this latest election, there were 90 million people who did not vote—that’s a lot of people! This is after an estimated 99% of votes had been counted, according to the University of Florida Election Lab.
To us, as a political party, 90 million eligible voters not voting is an abject failure in terms of political participation." |
|
"Why do people choose not to vote? You can see different reasons and excuses on this slide contrasted with voter turnout over the years. This is for presidential elections; however, when you look at midterm elections, voter turnout is even lower.
What we want to see as a political party is what you see in full democracies—voter turnout at 80% or higher. That’s a strong representation of the people’s voice. So, how do we break through these different reasons people don’t vote?" |
|
"Another area the global Democracy Index looks at is accessible voting processes. I see people in wheelchairs and with walkers going to vote, and of course you praise them for doing that—but they shouldn’t be waiting nine hours to vote or struggling to load up their wheelchairs.
There was even a recorded instance in a recent election where people waited in line so long that they ordered a pizza, received it, and finished eating it before reaching the front of the line. Having to wait that long is ridiculous." |
|
"If you look at where things are going in terms of our population, how do we make it easier for elderly people, people with disabilities, or those with other health or mobility challenges, so they don’t have to stand in line for nine hours—or even an hour—to vote?"
|
|
"What we’re looking at as a party is tapping into the use of cellphones—and you can see people in line here looking at their phones—to improve political participation."
|
|
"Biometric mobile voting is something we talked about back in 2012. I will say this concept was made in the USA, and that we, as The Altruist Party, were the first in the world to mention biometric mobile voting."
|
|
"A few months after we presented the concept of biometric mobile voting, Jamaica began looking into applying biometrics to mobile voting. So it’s not just us thinking about it and how it could help improve democracy.
You can see examples of biometric authentication on this slide, and we’ll talk about how to secure such a concept from a cybersecurity standpoint. New innovations like quantum computing and cryptography can secure all of this, making it believable, accurate, and a true upgrade to the democratic process through technology." |
|
"There are different types of biometric authentication methods in place today. We can sign into our cellphones with facial ID, some workplaces use iris recognition, and fingerprint recognition is common as well. There are already many biometric authentication methods on phones, laptops, tablets, and other devices. Even banks now use voice recognition when you call to access your account—so there are all types of biometrics already in place today."
|
|
"These are examples of current uses of biometrics in U.S. federal agencies. These are just a few cases, but you can see that a lot of biometric technology is already in place. What this means is that, yes, there are databases that already store your biometrics. For instance, your driver’s license is in a biometric database, and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) uses your biometric ID at the airport when you go through security and stand in front of a camera that scans your face to confirm your identity."
|
|
"Looking at where biometrics are being used in different U.S. federal agencies, you can see that the Department of Homeland Security is applying them across multiple areas—TSA, Customs & Border Protection, and more. Biometrics are already being used widely today."
|
|
"This is an example of someone passing through TSA security for a flight. Many of us have already gone through this process, so it’s not new to be biometrically identified and verified as who you are.
So biometrics is not something that needs to be created out of thin air—it already exists. What we’re talking about is applying it to the voting process to show that the people voting are actually who they say they are." |
|
"Customs & Border Protection monitors who comes in and out of the country, ensuring people are not on criminal lists or wanted as criminals internationally.
Today, over 540 million travelers worldwide are already using biometric identification to confirm who they are for various travel-related purposes." |
|
"When you look at upgrading democracy with technology, consider the evolution of cellphones. This image doesn’t even go up to 2024—it’s just an example of how cellphones evolved into smartphones over time.
But compared to that, democracy in the U.S. hasn’t been upgraded since 1992, which was the year of the last constitutional amendment. I think this image helps visualize how ancient our democracy is compared to the pace and evolution of smartphone technology—and shows that there is now an opportunity to integrate the use of smartphones to help upgrade democracy." |
|
"If you look at cellphone and smartphone ownership levels in 2024, you can see that just about everyone already has one—reaching close to 100%.
So, in this case of upgrading democracy in the U.S., where we’re talking about biometric mobile connectivity as a basic human right, we’re not having to identify large numbers of people who still need phones. And if you look at different age groups—who has a cellphone, a smartphone, or no phone at all—you can see that nearly everyone already has one. So why not use smartphones to help upgrade the democratic process? That way, people aren’t standing in line for hours, elderly, disabled, or immobilized voters aren’t forced to do the hard work of traveling to polling places, and at the same time we can tap into a accurate way to measure public sentiment." |
|
"Looking at the current voting process today—in particular, mail-in voting—I’ve highlighted the word ‘SIGN.’ We’ll look at what’s used today and where we think, as a party, that’s flawed."
|
|
"Today, the current mail-in voting process varies somewhat state by state, but here’s the general process:
|
|
"The process looks, more or less, like this:
|
|
"In some states, such as California, we have ballot tracking. So I can ask:
I think this is a problem when it comes to transparency in the voting process. As a voter, I don’t just want to know that my vote was counted—I want to know that my vote was counted correctly." |
|
"Here is a screenshot of what California's current online ballot tracking website looks like at a high-level. Once you mail-in your ballot, you can login and
|
|
"Most of the time, at least 99% of the time your vote gets to the right place.
'There is no standardized national system for tracking whether a ballot was counted. The ballot tracking landscape is a 'mess, because it’s 50 different systems, and within each of those 50 systems, there [are] county registrars, so everybody has slightly different methods. When you vote in person, you can see your vote be submitted, and it’s 'a fair bet' that your ballot will count. As such, no state offers ballot tracking for in-person voting.'" |
|
"But you can't see if your vote was counted correctly."
|
|
"And also, if your signature on your mail-in ballot does not match what the state has on record, your ballot can be rejected.
These are examples of differences in a person’s signature that could cause their mail-in ballot to be rejected and not counted. Same names, same people—yet they just signed their name a little differently. Maybe they were younger when they first signed, or older now and their hands are shakier. In the current process, when you mail in your ballot, your signature alone can make or break whether your vote is counted." |
|
"There are different reasons why the current process is flawed. It could be improved through processes such as using artificial intelligence (AI) for first-level signature verification, followed by human review. But it shouldn’t be a judgment call—it should be very clear-cut: the ballot came from a U.S. citizen, and that person is verified as a U.S. citizen based on their biometric record.
Even when voting in person, it should be clear that the individual is who they say they are, as a U.S. citizen, based on their biometric record—just like what we already do at the airport with TSA or when crossing international borders. The current system for signature verification is outdated and ineffective. Perfectly valid ballots are being discarded when they should be counted, not thrown out." |
|
"This is something I found interesting: young voters are not used to physically signing their names, such as writing in cursive. Most grew up only using their phones or keyboards.
So you’ll see differences in how people sign their names—for example, signing differently when they were younger compared to as they get older. I know my own signature has changed over time." |
|
"Here are the ballot signature matching laws by state, as mail-in voting becomes more popular across the country. In some states, signatures are reviewed, and ballots are either accepted or rejected based on signature matching."
|
|
"These are the rejection rates of ballot signature matching. Thankfully, the rates are not extremely high—but all of these people still had their votes discarded because their signatures didn’t match.
That’s a real concern, especially when there are better ways to handle this—ways that remove any question of whether the person sending in the ballot is a U.S. citizen and the actual voter." |
|
"Here are the current ways that ballots are looked at and get rejected or not. There are certainly better ways to do this."
|
|
"This is something that's never been shown before, and we as a party believe all of this should be nonprofit. No entity should be profiting of upgrading democracy with technology. And so, as the party who came up with this concept, we are giving away this concept for free.
We see that there is already biometric authentication with ID.me (for example), a program the IRS uses for authentication of U.S. taxpayers, or to apply or get your passport updated, etc. |
|
"So, in addition to your signature, you could receive a code from your ID.me app, for example, where you log in biometrically and then add your code to your ballot.
The only way your ballot would have a code is through this biometric authentication system. If a code were issued to you as a voter, it would also inform the state’s system that a voter has submitted a ballot and that the ballot should be tracked to delivery. Think of the code as a kind of tracking number as well." |
|
"You can see here that ID.me is already used by the IRS."
|
|
"ID.me is used by the Veterans Administration and the Social Security Administration…so a system of biometric authentication is already in play."
|
|
"Therefore, you could integrate biometric authentication into the voting process today, the process would look like this: Once you have your mail-in ballot, you would mark your votes as usual."
|
|
"Then you would sign-in biometrically to ID.me to get the code to send in with your mail-in ballot."
|
|
"Then, instead of your signature, you would add your code to the ballot. Now your ballot is linked to you in an encrypted way through that code, securely connecting you to the ballot.
This process verifies that you are a U.S. citizen who is voting and that you are registered in the system to receive a code that officially identifies you and links you to your ballot." |
|
"Then, you would send your ballot in with your ID.me code..."
|
|
“And then you would sign in to track your ballot—just like in states such as California, where tracking is already available today.”
|
|
"And instead of only seeing that your ballot made it to the right location, as you can today to confirm that your ballot was counted…"
|
|
"Then you could see not only whether your ballot was counted—but also whether it was counted correctly.
This could be achieved through different methods, such as linking your mail-in ballot to an ID.me code. State officials could verify the ID.me code alongside your signature (if required), confirm your identification, and attach the code to your ballot. That cross-check would validate that your ballot was both received and counted accurately. Ideally, miscounted votes would be eliminated. But if an error did occur, you as the voter could see that your vote was miscounted and contact the state to have it corrected. Today, no such option exists, that has mobile biometric authentication for voting with a paper trail." |
|
"What would biometric mobile voting with a paper trail look like? Here is at least one example conceptual framework:
1. Integrate Quantum and Post-Quantum Computing
This means using the most advanced computer security available—strong enough to protect against even future quantum computers that could break today’s encryption. Quantum technology would keep every vote transmission completely secure, while post-quantum encryption locks the data so it can’t be altered or faked. Together, they make the voting system virtually unhackable and future-proof." |
|
2. Enhanced Multi-Modal Biometric Authentication
This means verifying each voter’s identity through multiple biometric methods — like fingerprints, facial recognition, or an iris scan — to make sure every vote truly comes from the right person. That information would be locked away using next-generation encryption so advanced that even future quantum computers couldn’t break it. Your biometric data would be used only to confirm who you are, never to track or expose your personal identity." |
|
3. Paper Trail and Blockchain Security
This means every digital vote would also create a printed receipt so voters can confirm their choices and auditors can verify results later. Behind the scenes, all votes would be stored on a secure, tamper-proof blockchain—an unchangeable digital ledger—protected by quantum-safe encryption. Together, the paper record and blockchain make the system fully transparent, traceable, and virtually impossible to manipulate." |
|
"This shows voting technology currently used for signature matching. You can see that hand-counted paper verification of signatures began to decline in the early 2000s as other technologies emerged. Now, nearly 80% of signature verification is done by optical scan.
None of these technologies would be needed with biometric mobile voting, because the only way to get a code to place on your ballot is if you are already in the system as a U.S. citizen eligible to vote, and you obtain your code through biometric authentication that the system already has in place today." |
|
4. Secure Private Vote Confirmation
This means every voter would get a unique, quantum-secure confirmation code for casting their vote, allowing them to privately check that it was received and counted correctly. A secure online portal—protected by advanced encryption—would ensure only the voter can access this information. It gives every citizen direct, verifiable proof that their voice truly counted." |
|
5. Implementation, Testing, and Security Assurance
This means starting with small pilot programs to test the system’s security, usability, and reliability before nationwide use. Independent experts would continually audit and stress-test the system using advanced, quantum-safe encryption to find and fix any weaknesses. It ensures the technology stays trustworthy, transparent, and ready for the future." |
|
6. Pilot Programs and Gradual Rollout
This means introducing the new voting system gradually, starting with pilot programs and public education to help voters understand how it works and why it’s more secure. Election officials would receive thorough training to ensure everything runs smoothly and transparently. The goal is to build confidence and familiarity before expanding it nationwide." |
|
FINAL PREP: Pilot Programs and Gradual Rollout
This means testing the full voting system in select areas first, gathering feedback, and improving it before expanding nationwide. Special attention would be given to voters who often face barriers—like seniors, people with disabilities, rural residents, low-income families, and those serving overseas—to ensure everyone can participate easily. The system would roll out gradually with strong support, help desks, and accessibility tools like voice commands and screen readers so every voter can use it confidently and securely." |
|
"This is the situation we want to avoid, and unfortunately where we are at today..."
|
|
"How do we get rid of this gridlock?"
|
|
"How do we prevent Americans from getting angry and butting heads or getting in fights on XYZ topics..."
|
|
"And move onto a system where everyone feels that their voice is equally heard?"
|
|
"And citizens don't feel like they need to protest because they're voices are not being heard..."
|
|
"And get rid of this old concept where 'The government doesn't listen to people.'?
The Altruist Party wants to focus on bringing accurate measurement of public sentiment to the forefront—integrated with real acknowledgment from government and legislators—so that it actually impacts laws. And those laws, in turn, impact all of us…" |
|
"And, to return to The Altruist Party’s objectives: to make sure public sentiment is acknowledged and heard. If it is not, and representatives have approval ratings below the majority, then they should be removed and replaced with representatives who acknowledge the majority of their constituents—aligned with accurate measurement of public sentiment."
|
|
"When we talk about amending the Constitution, this is currently how you can do it:
Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution provides two ways amendments can be proposed—either by Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate, or by a national convention called by two-thirds of state legislatures. To become valid, proposed amendments must then be ratified by three-fourths of the states, either through their legislatures or state conventions. When was the last time this was done?" |
|
"Here are all of the amendments to the Constitution since its inception.
In the past 50 years, there have only been two amendments added to the U.S. Constitution." |
|
"In 1971, the voting age was changed to 18 years old...this is what was going on at the time."
|
|
"And here is what was going on in 1992, over 30 years ago, which limited pay raises in Congress.
This was the last time the U.S. Constitution was upgraded." |
|
"As a reminder, this is what cellphones looked like in 1992. You can see how much cellphone and smartphone technology has advanced since the last time the U.S. Constitution was upgraded.
It's not time to use mobile technology to help upgrade our democracy." |
|
"What do Americans agree on? I know it doesn’t seem like we agree on much—especially when viewing the U.S. from overseas—but as you can see, the majority of Americans agree on these fundamental rights:
As you’ve seen today, The Altruist Party is a strong advocate of the Right to Vote and Equal Protection. We are also strong proponents of the Right to Privacy—especially personal privacy—and, of course, Freedom of Religion, which we firmly support as well." |
|
"Where do we start, for example, when it comes to measuring votes on public sentiment? Where do we want to make changes? How do we want to upgrade our Constitution?
As you can see in the top bar graphs of this image, there is a lot of agreement among Americans. But toward the bottom—such as with the Right to Bear Arms—you can see differences among Americans on matters of gun control. Many Americans agree, for instance, that those with a history of mental health issues, domestic violence, and similar concerns should not be allowed to purchase guns. This is an important topic, and we believe as a party that Americans should have a direct say in upgrading gun control laws." |
|
"From the viewpoint of what was important to both Republican and Democratic voters in the last election, you can see that the economy and immigration were highly important to Republican voters, while maintaining democracy in the U.S. and Supreme Court justice picks were most important to Democratic voters.
You can clearly see the differences in what each group views as most important to them as voters." |
|
"What The Altruist Party is proposing—and these are just examples—are public sentiment votes on:
At the bottom of this image, you can see other examples that could also be put to a public sentiment vote. Political appointee reform is especially important in the U.S., where the President-elect can appoint over 4,000 people to positions throughout government. Political appointees are placed in government positions not through election by the people, but subjectively by the President. In most democracies and constitutional republics, these positions are filled through popular vote. By contrast, in other democracies and constitutional republics, the President or Prime Minister can appoint only tens or hundreds of people, but certainly not thousands." |
|
"How does Ranked Choice Voting work?
Ranked choice voting can improve political pluralism and treat third parties more fairly by allowing voters to support alternative candidates without fear of "wasting" their vote, thereby encouraging a wider range of political voices and reducing the spoiler effect. Ranked choice voting also makes citizens feel more represented by allowing them to express a broader range of preferences — not just a single pick — which gives voters more voice in the outcome and reduces pressure to choose between only the two major parties." |
|
"This quote is interesting, especially when you see opposition from elected officials and candidates about ranked choice voting:
‘Sometimes, when we see party opposition, that can be a reflection of elected officials who know how to campaign, know how to win under the old system, and are not quite ready to throw that system out yet.’ This is a good example of upgrading democracy, where you’re not really changing the voting process all that much. Ranked choice voting is already in practice in multiple states and other countries, and it’s a strong example of how the U.S. could upgrade our democracy in a way that’s already being successfully practiced in many places around the world." |
|
"Here are some advantages and disadvantages to ranked choice voting:
Advantages
Challenges
When you consider the initial learning curve, it’s important to remember that this applies to most things—such as when optical scanning was first implemented for mail-in voting. All of these challenges have been, and can be, overcome. The advantages of ranked choice voting far outweigh the challenges, which is why The Altruist Party is an advocate for it. This could be something the public votes on: do we change to a ranked choice voting system, or stay with what exists today? That decision should be put to a popular vote. Another thing to consider is whether to keep the Electoral College or upgrade it in some way. That, too, should be decided by a popular vote." |
|
"Another example of where the popular vote could help is immigration reform, particularly the path to citizenship. You can see here that there is strong support for a path to citizenship (74%). This is something the public should be able to vote on."
|
|
"An immigration path to citizenship concept that we've talked about in the past is the reviving the Civilian Conservation Corps. In this picture you can see Franklin Delano Roosevelt (F.D.R.), back when it was created:
The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) was a work relief program that gave millions of young men employment on environmental projects during the Great Depression. Considered by many to be one of the most successful of Roosevelt’s New Deal programs, the CCC planted more than three billion trees and constructed trails and shelters in more than 800 parks nationwide during its nine years of existence. The CCC helped to shape the modern national and state park systems we enjoy today. The CCC also built forest roads, park roads, truck trails, and fire roads within state and national parks, forests, and other public lands." |
|
"What we’re seeing today is that young Americans want a national service program like the CCC.
Young Americans have consistently voiced support for national service programs, yet political action has not caught up. A 2021 survey revealed that 71% of adults under 25 were open to participating in a service program. Even more striking, a poll conducted last year found that about 75% of young people supported mandatory national service. These numbers tell a clear story: young Americans’ appetite for civic engagement is strong and growing. Reviving the CCC is something we, as a party, advocate. Young Americans could join out of high school or college, and know they could join and have a guaranteed job, and even remain in the CCC as a career, working their way up. The CCC could also serve as a path to citizenship." |
|
"If you look at the status of infrastructure in the U.S., a CCC 2.0 could help strengthen it and prepare the country for climate change adaptation.
In this graph—showing roads, bridges, rail, water pipes, dams, levees, and water treatment plants—you can see that the average age of U.S. infrastructure is older than its original life expectancy. It’s clear that many infrastructure updates and upgrades are needed." |
|
"Right now, the entire fate of the U.S. West's water rests on the shoulders of one 27-year-old man. Is that the best way to go about such major decision-making for the country?"
|
|
"This is another example of where public sentiment could help with such important infrastructure decisions.
The Altruist Party is promoting the idea that organizations like the ones you see here—all of these experts on water and water management—should be able to help inform these critical decisions. And why shouldn’t all of us as voters, if we’re interested in water management, also be able to contribute? Our responses and ideas could be accurately measured to determine which option the public supports most. So instead of relying on one person, we would be crowdsourcing everyone’s ideas to ensure the best possible options are considered and voted on through public sentiment. Subject matter experts and interested citizens alike would have their voices and ideas heard—and officially acknowledged—by the governments making these decisions. This is just one example." |
|
"Here are additional examples of where public sentiment could be measured and acted upon, based on The People's Vote:
|
|
"We could have a People’s Vote on the Buffett Rules:
Warren Buffett has famously stated that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary, and as this report shows, this situation is not uncommon. These are issues we could vote on as The People—measures that could also help fund or subsidize known areas of need, such as childcare costs, first-time home buyers, basic living needs, and more." |
|
The Founding Fathers established the Electoral College in the Constitution, in part, as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. This is how the Electoral College works:
The Electoral College is a two-step system: citizens vote for electors → electors vote for president. States mostly operate under winner-take-all rules, and the magic number is 270 out of 538. Nowadays, the popular vote determines every elected official position but the President. Establishing the popular vote as a way to determine the President is something more and more Americans are becoming interested in." |
|
"You can see here that the majority of Americans favor amending the Constitution to base the Presidential election winner on the popular vote.
This is an excellent example of where The People’s Vote could help determine whether the Electoral College should be abolished or reformed, based on the fact that a majority of Americans want to see this change." |
|
"You can see in this graphic who wants to continue the Electoral College system and who does not. Currently, in the U.S., over 60% of Americans want to get rid of the Electoral College and move to the popular vote—just like every other election, where whoever gets the most votes wins the Presidential election.
When you look at the desire to eliminate the Electoral College by age group, you can also see that the majority of age groups agree the U.S. should move to the popular vote. If you look at who is against getting rid of the Electoral College, it’s primarily Republican-leaning, heavily conservative voters. From my perspective, I don’t believe they feel like their voices will be heard, and they worry their preferred candidate may never win the presidency again if we move to the popular vote. But with Ranked Choice Voting, and with upgrading the democratic process to include public sentiment and public acknowledgment of that sentiment by elected officials, these voters would still be heard. Moving to the popular vote would also prevent Electoral College voters from going against the popular vote—a situation that has happened before, but should never be possible in a democratic Constitutional Republic." |
|
"By party, you can see who wants to move to the popular vote and who does not:
The lower numbers among Republican voters may be because they do not believe they will be heard or represented. But overall, you can see that the weight of public opinion is moving away from the Electoral College and toward the popular vote." |
|
"Overall, regardless of party, 63% of Americans want to move to the popular vote."
|
|
"So again, how would biometric mobile voting on public sentiment work—for example, to get rid of the Electoral College and move to the popular vote?"
|
|
"You would sign in biometrically to receive your code (e.g., ID.me code)."
|
|
"The process would be the same thing in all elections, including the Presidential election, and The People's Vote process would be the same thing."
|
|
"You would mail-in your ballot, including your biometrically provided code."
|
|
"You would track your ballot, as you can do today."
|
|
"You would check to see if your ballot has been received and counted."
|
|
"And then you would check to see if your ballot was counted correctly. If it wasn’t, you could call the state election office and work through corrections with them.
This process could be applied to any measure of public sentiment, and under a new constitutional amendment, elected officials would be required to publicly acknowledge their constituents’ sentiment. If they failed to do so, and their approval rating fell below a majority (51%), they would risk recall." |
|
"In terms of monitoring the voting process and election integrity, there are already several third-party government watchdogs that are experts at measuring public sentiment.
These entities could work together in a nonprofit capacity—or rotate responsibility—so that votes on public sentiment can be audited and unanimously validated. If anything shady or questionable is happening, they could raise concerns. Using existing, reputable watchdogs helps ensure that The People’s Vote is accurate before it is presented to elected officials and legislators for public acknowledgment. For example, if 80% of Americans want a better path to citizenship for immigrants, Congress would have to acknowledge it and act—or risk a 90-day recall to remove them from office." |
|
"That is the end of today’s presentation, and as I do at the end of many of my presentations, I’d like to remind us all…"
|
|
"We are all one big human family. 99.9% of us are genetically similar, and that is something to be proud of…"
|
|
"We all feel the same emotions, we’re sovereign and sentient beings, and we all have these internal experiences—and we want to be heard.
That’s probably one of the biggest frustrations I have: we all want to be heard, no matter how we’re feeling, and to have our voices validated. We want our legislators—the people we elect—to truly and measurably represent us." |
|
"What makes our human family unique? We all generally think with the same brain structure:
And we don’t want our voices to be ignored—especially by our elected government officials who are supposed to represent us." |
|
"Another thing that is unique about being human is that we are essentially born altruistic and with a strong sense of fairness. For instance, many children will call out whether you’re following the rules of a game or being fair or not."
|
|
"We are the only species that makes art. Just consider the creative innovations of biometric mobile voting or the James Webb Telescope—human creativity is endless and can help us as a species."
|
|
"We are the only species that has mastered written language. No other species passes massive amounts of wisdom and knowledge in a written form from one generation to the next.
The internet is also great for this, as it allows us to share our ideas with future generations. A hundred years from now, people may look at the things we’ve created—or that you’ve created—and gain new ideas from them." |
|
"We are the only species that can make music in a synchronized way
|
|
"Music is something that has helped us communally throughout history, and we are the only species that can dance to music—staying synchronized and anticipating the rhythm and beat.
This has helped us socialize as a species. We all enjoy going to a party, club, or bar to be with others—and you see people tapping their feet, moving to the music. This is something unique to us as a species. Let’s appreciate that." |
|
"We are the only species that can look into the future and the past--at the same time."
|
|
"We also have a fundamental need, or urge, to link our minds together. So, it's important that we feel heard and connected.
If you look at this from a globalization standpoint, we're already connected globally through the internet." |
|
"We are the only species known to connect with other's physical, mental, and emotional states through empathy—putting ourselves 'in other's shoes'."
|
|
"If you look at altruism from a purely mathematical standpoint, it is favored by chance over extreme narcissism.
If you put a room full of altruists against a room full of narcissists, the altruists will eventually achieve a better outcome than the narcissists. Even mathematics shows that." |
|
"Humans are the only species with mirror neurons, which allow us to empathize with each other. A common example is seeing someone stub their toe badly—you cringe and say, 'Ouch, that must have hurt.' That reaction happens because you can 'feel their pain' by watching their pain, and because you’ve probably experienced stubbing your toe before. Your mirror neurons fire in your brain, helping us empathize and connect socially.
I recommend watching the video of two toddlers in China who were orphans being reunited. If you watch it, you’ll feel your mirror neurons firing—their happiness will make you want to cry. You can literally see their happiness and feel it yourself. No other species is currently known to do that." |
|
"We also want to point out, from a parental education perspective, that the empathy, wisdom, and knowledge you teach and share with your children can determine whether they go to college or to prison—and research shows this."
|
|
"We want to emphasize that every single person can make a ripple in society—one that has positive impacts. It doesn’t have to be a millionaire or a leader; it can be anybody at any level.
'True leadership is only possible when character is more important than authority. It is character - not money, not position - that turns seemingly average individuals, teammates, coaches, administrators, directors, supervisors, judges, legislators, executives, Presidents, and Prime Ministers into true leaders.' If you tap into your own sense of greatness and what makes you (hopefully) altruistic, you can create a positive ripple effect, too." |
|
Not left. Not right. Altruist.