Given the discussion on the electoral college, I must provide my long-held pet solution. "The electoral college shall be composed of members of Congress recently elected." This makes the country quasi-parliamentary. In the first two years the President would be aligned with a party that controls at least one house of Congress, and perhaps both. (Presumably, this newly elected Congress would elect Bush, but it might not always be so). Split Congresses are still possible, the number of electors per state is the same as now (excepting the District of Columbia problem, and DC should be retroceded to Maryland anyway, but that's another story), and it simplifies things greatly. I say quasi-parliamentary, because the President would still not be easily removed, the current impeachment rules would still be in place and their would be no "no confidence" votes. The President would not lose power just because one or both houses of Congress shifts in the off-year election. Relevant quizbowl twist: Had this been in place, who would have been elected in the following years (assuming Congressional elections were not changed as a result of this procedure): A. 1980 B. 1992 C. 1996 only 1992 would have favored Clinton, Carter would have won 1980, Dole 1996. Seemingly now Congressional elections would be very different as a result, they would turn on the candidates party (or Presidential endorsement) more so than today.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST