the reasons the vote was expanded had little to do with building a better democracy. it was a type of gerrymandering. we don't tend to see it like that, even as we're voting for liberal politicians that have no interest in listening to us. yet, if you understand the expansion of suffrage in those terms, as one really should, then reversing it is little more than continuing forward the process of gerrymandering.

the way the debate is framed in a boardroom context has basically no resemblance to how it's framed in a popular context.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/14/investing/tom-perkins-vote/index.html