S128 of the Constitution, adopted under pressure I understand from Sir John Forrest pressing parochial WA interests, could be junked by a vote of a majority of the people in a majority of States (another provision that needs democratising). This puts the overrepresented residents in a blocking position.

Finding a way to override the legal system to achieve democratisation (Godfather offer to the overrepresented States?) would depend on agreement on what democratisation is and to what extent as a nation we are committed to democracy. However it is right and proper for citizens to consider constantly and actively what is the right thing no matter what the inbred legal system is able to deliver. The deficiencies of the Constitution can’t properly be advanced as a conversation-stopper.

A spectacular case of the legal system's inability to cope with getting things right, and ultimately having to be overridden, is that of Mrs Chamberlain. I recall when, with her held unjustly in prison because of perversion of the course of justice by the prosecution and a prejudiced NT jury disdainful of forensic principles, a prominent law-wonk proclaiming on Radio National that as every legal avenue had now run its course the question of whether Mrs Chamberlain did or didn't murder her daughter was IRRELEVANT! A non-question. Calling on parliament to act was an assault on law, the fool intoned. (The irony in that case was the fact that the trial judge was meticulous and honest, all but instructing the jury not to convict – leaving no legalisms for law-wonks to appeal about).

I can only admire EmperorJulian's innocence. In any campaign over a referendum to alter Section 128, the scare campaign would concentrate on the things that could be done if it were changed, such as abolishing equal representation in the Senate, thus ensuring its defeat.

The only way that I can see that any of these changes could be implemented would be to hold a referendum to provide that all future referendums, including this referendum, would be carried if a majority of people voted "NO'.

The only problem then is which way would you vote in such a referendum.

What we really need is citizen initiated referendum, where changes can be implemented in the teeth of the opposition of the whole political class. However there is no need to worry, the chances of this being implemented are again slightly less than zero.

Just for fun, let us dwell on some of the proposals that could be implemented if citizen initiated referendum were to become law.

1. The salaries of all politicians could be reduced to the level of the dole, and many electors would still consider them to be overpaid.

2. The problem of corrupting political donations could be solved by providing that the only money politicians could spend on getting elected was that raised by putting their daughters on the streets.

3. All foreign aid could be terminated on the principle that charity begins at home.

4. Governments could be required to treble spending, abolish all taxation, balance the budget and pay off the foreign debt, with any deficiency in government finances being made up from the sale of politicians' assets.

I could go on with many more, but would have to wait until the flying pigs have passed over.

Candidates for election in Australia are selected by political parties --- the pre-selection process -- not the electorate at large. A way to increase the "directly chosen by the people" component in elections both for the Senate (s.7) and the House (s.24) would be to move one step back in the whole process and institute Primary Elections of candidates, as is done in the U.S. Primaries winnow a field of candidates prior to an upcoming general or by-election. They were specifically instituted to take the power of candidate nomination away from party leaders and give it to the people. A quick example of how this works (it varies among states): There's an election for State governor in New Jersey this November. The incumbent is a Republican and several Democratic challengers have announced at this time. When you register to vote in NJ you may (but don't have to) declare a party affiliation. Primary elections take place in June, when voters choose their affiliated party's candidate to run in November's Gubernatorial election. This month marks the last date by which a voter may choose, delete, or change a party affiliation.

Among the states more generally, primary elections may be closed or open, or somewhere in between. In closed primaries (like NJ), you may only choose among the candidates of your party affiliation, In semi-closed primaries, the unaffiliated may vote as well. In open primaries, a registered voter may vote in any party primary regardless of his/her own party affiliation. In my opinion, the primary election process works well and I've participated since first registering to vote. Because of Primaries, I would say that voters in the U.S. have the potential to enjoy much greater participation in the entire election process compared to the situation in Australia. Of course, only about half the eligible voters in the U.S. get to the polls at all.

I also want to quickly comment on EmperorJulian's second suggestion in his first post that the equality of state representation in the senate be abolished in favor of representation proportional to state population. This would negate the whole idea of the senate being the "States' house". The idea was critical in inducing the smaller states to join the Australian federation (as it was to the U.S. federation before that). Having equal number of senators made the smaller states comfortable they would not be overwhelmed by the larger, more populous states in the federal government. To renege on that now, would be dishonorable, in my opinion.

Given we elect 6 senators per election (unless a double dissolution is called) then why is it voters have to number every box for every candidate? That makes no sense, particularly when there is a high number of candidates. Simplify the process and make it easier for voters by simply requiring the numbering to match the vacancies.