So "voter disgust with DC"means turning it over to Repukes?!1 We have an insane system of government

[UTUSN]

Last edited Sun Nov 2, 2014, 06:41 PM - Edit history (1)

Even if Repukes have a worse approval rate than Dems. We have a system of government that meets the definition of insanity: Doing something repeatedly expecting different results -- SPECIFICALLY, constantly electing opposite parties, Congres vs POTUS . So we have this rigid apparatus of perpetual elections and electioneering, with burned out voters and the whole thing encrusted with ever less open competition due to voting impediments like Gerrymandering and voter suppression and oligarchic money. But it didn’t just happen, it was built-in to the system with the vaunted “checks and balances” that are the institutionalization of gridlock.

Parliamentary systems are more flexible and responsive. So changing the Constitution is purposely hard to head off mob hysteria, nah, the pace of life is not 1789’s. My wish list (the Eternal Game of If-I-Ruled-the-World) :

* Abolish the Electoral College.

* "States" are for basic services only: One vote and one Right anywhere equals one everywhere.

* Regional primaries (4-5) and then the General Election.

* Six year presidential term, one time only.

* A uni-cameral congress, 6 yr terms staggered by thirds.

* Districts by contiguity and population.

* Regional elections of Supreme Court justices, 10 yr terms, two terms limited.

[shenmue]

1. A lot of those are good

I remember how bad it really was the last time we slipped and let more Republicans in the Congress and White House. It was horrible.

Even if you aren't that pleased with the Dems, if you haven't seen how bad the Republicans can get... talk to someone who has.

Please, vote. And vote Dems.

[Man from Pickens]

2. One six-year terms for President sounds good

This country seems to have a pattern of electing Presidents twice then souring on them by year 6.

I also think geometrically-compact districting (by mathematical solution, zero discretion) is a good answer to get some representation back.

[MADem]

3. I don't think there's much motivation to do many of these things.

It would require turning our founding document, the Constitution of the United States, into -- as George W. Bush called it -- just a effing piece of paper.

Redistricting in a reasonable way is about the only feasible thing I see happening. People are talking about that already.

States will never give up their prerogatives. It just won't happen. They want to decide what they can tax, when their liquor stores and bars are open, and what they view as important. The federal government can persuade them with carrots and sticks to get in line with other states, but they are free to resist that pressure if they'd like. They won't give up control over their elections either. They put their people on the ballot, too, and they pay for the process.

The two term Presidency was a change that happened in the 20th century--because that's the first time anyone ever got popular enough to manage to pull out more than two terms. A unicameral legislature takes away checks and balances--not a good move. You get a bunch of crazies in session and who knows what they might pass? And Supreme Court justices? Neither the Presidents are going to give up the perk of picking them, and leaving their mark down the years on the court, nor the Senate the opportunity to advise and consent over them--so that's just not going to happen.

If you bought a giant island and were making a new country, those ideas might be a good experiment, to try that out on your population and see how it works, but we're too entrenched to change. We might amend our Constitution here and there, but we won't get rid of our basic system.

[UTUSN]

5. Yip, will never happen, not these or any modifications, therefore we crumble like every other.

And I don't mean MY changes. The entrenchment is complete on ANY changes.

[MADem]

6. Well, we redestrict after every census.

That's all down to populations. MA lost a rep as a consequence of the last lot. Mitt Romney's failure to bring jobs to the Bay State resulted in a large exodus, and it cost us a congressman. Now the people are flooding back, but we have to wait for the next census to get our body back.

It is hard to change the structure--most people here don't remember the ERA. I do, though. I was very invested in that.

[onecaliberal]

4. I don't buy it.

It's the corporate medias meme. It's just not true.

[jeepers]

7. Constitutional author

James Madison wanted the constitution to be sacrosanct. Jefferson thought it should be amendable, even disposable.

[unblock]

8. figuring out how to get money out of politics would go a long way toward solving many problems.