3 ms·

Might as well do away with the position of president too. That's way too much power in the hands of a single person who, as donald regularly demonstrates, could

Might as well do away with the position of president too. That's way too much power in the hands of a single person who, as donald regularly demonstrates, could act arbitrarily.

rukittenme 9y ago
I don't think you would need to do away with the presidency. But it does need additional controls and safeguards put in place. Controls and safeguards that have existed but have been removed over successive generations.
padobson 9y ago
What's interesting is we already have the political infrastructure in place to do this. Lose the presidency and let each member of the cabinet run their own section of government. In addition to losing the single executive, you'd need to make some other constitutional tweaks e.g. deploying the military would require a consensus between the Secretaries of State, Defense, and DHS (and maybe Treasury?). Something like that could end the imperial executive branch with a very simple distribution of power.
krapp 9y ago
>Might as well do away with the position of president too. I actually half support this idea. Why do we need a President? What powers does that one person in that one office have which couldn't better be delegated to the states?
AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
Actually presidential election is only time where special interests can't tip the scale easily. Right now that's the only change where people get their say. Just 1/3rd of senators get elected every two years and only handful among those races are balanced where special interest can tip scales with little effort. Same for congressional elections, few places with 50/50 spread where money can easily gain influence. Presidential election is too big, at the exact same time, for money to wield influence. I for one am glad that we have presidential elections, people have some voice, at least.
unabridged 9y ago
Definitely. I would rather have a parliamentary system with tons of representatives.

Might as well do away with the position of president too. That's way too much power in the hands of a single person who, as donald regularly demonstrates, could act arbitrarily.

rukittenme 9y ago

I don't think you would need to do away with the presidency. But it does need additional controls and safeguards put in place. Controls and safeguards that have existed but have been removed over successive generations.

padobson 9y ago

What's interesting is we already have the political infrastructure in place to do this. Lose the presidency and let each member of the cabinet run their own section of government. In addition to losing the single executive, you'd need to make some other constitutional tweaks e.g. deploying the military would require a consensus between the Secretaries of State, Defense, and DHS (and maybe Treasury?). Something like that could end the imperial executive branch with a very simple distribution of power.

krapp 9y ago

>Might as well do away with the position of president too. I actually half support this idea. Why do we need a President? What powers does that one person in that one office have which couldn't better be delegated to the states?

AmIFirstToThink 9y ago

Actually presidential election is only time where special interests can't tip the scale easily. Right now that's the only change where people get their say. Just 1/3rd of senators get elected every two years and only handful among those races are balanced where special interest can tip scales with little effort. Same for congressional elections, few places with 50/50 spread where money can easily gain influence. Presidential election is too big, at the exact same time, for money to wield influence. I for one am glad that we have presidential elections, people have some voice, at least.

unabridged 9y ago

Definitely. I would rather have a parliamentary system with tons of representatives.