Peter Merel Posted about 1 year ago Present democracy is like a verdict by a mob that does not attend a trial. Tribunocracy is a better way. If tribunal members are drawn from the general population, money invested in influencing that population will affect them too. Since they are also susceptible to corruption through personal threats or incentives they're more susceptible to influence than the general population. Of course doing that would be criminal, but in the USA you have congressional leaders on record passing out checks on the floor of the house to influence votes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAC2xeT2yOg) - do your really think sequestration would prevent such people from having their way?