AHC: Triune Executive/Presidency for the USA

As it says in the title, your challenge is to make the US have an Exective Office or Presidency composed of 3 more or less equal parts.

Could the role be divided and what would they be - eg Commander-in-Chief, Supreme Judge, Head of Senate?
 
As it says in the title, your challenge is to make the US have an Exective Office or Presidency composed of 3 more or less equal parts.

Could the role be divided and what would they be - eg Commander-in-Chief, Supreme Judge, Head of Senate?

What about in stead of having an election after the primaries, have the two final candidates of the two majority parties as Two of the Executives, with the one holding the majority being known as "Federal President" and the second being "Federal Chancellor".
For example in:
~ 1912, Wilson and Roosevelt.
~ 1960, Kennedy and Nixon sit as president.

- The two running mates are created duel vice-presidents, with the one holding majority being given the Head of Senate and the other being Head of Representatives

- Have an election to elect Commander-in-Chief, usually from high ranking military.

This puts the five remaining people to be known as Councillors in the Federal Council.

This is 7 executives, same as Switzerland. If you want more, how about:

Addition to these 7, what if the council also had to hold the Governors from each state. This puts 59 executives around the council :) hope this meets the AHC :D
 
what about in 1789. George Washington did not want to be a political or juditial head of his new nation and just wanted to be the Commander of Chief, so places John Jay as Supreme Judge and John Adams as Head of Senate.

This sees the executive of the United States split between three men.
 

jahenders

Banned
I can't see a complete triune for all things. However, I could see a triune of sorts convening for certain time-critical things that can't await congress. In those cases, you might have the Pres, the VP (who'd be the lead candidate from the other party), and maybe the Speaker of the House convene to get a quick interim decision. The VP (as pres of the Senate) and the Speaker of House could then follow-up for a full decision in their respective houses in a finite period of time -- perhaps a ratification vote is automatically scheduled in 30 days.
 
What would you call them? 'Consuls'?

Triumvirs, I should imagine. Maybe you could have a rotating system whereby one acts as C-in-C of the army, one is in charge of the civil govt., and one keeps an eye on the other two. Or else have two in charge of the govt., like the Roman Consuls, and one in charge of the army.
 
The easiest way I could see this happening is if you have the 3 branches of government each get their own executive (with the implication that the current executive / presidency also "gets" the army) as a way of further demarcating balances of power and checks and balances.
 
Triumvirs, I should imagine. Maybe you could have a rotating system whereby one acts as C-in-C of the army, one is in charge of the civil govt., and one keeps an eye on the other two. Or else have two in charge of the govt., like the Roman Consuls, and one in charge of the army.

Sounds reasonable.

I can't see a complete triune for all things. However, I could see a triune of sorts convening for certain time-critical things that can't await congress. In those cases, you might have the Pres, the VP (who'd be the lead candidate from the other party), and maybe the Speaker of the House convene to get a quick interim decision. The VP (as pres of the Senate) and the Speaker of House could then follow-up for a full decision in their respective houses in a finite period of time -- perhaps a ratification vote is automatically scheduled in 30 days.

Ideally we're trying to prevent a sole president office from forming in the first place as that would scotch a triumvirate office.
 
The easiest way I could see this happening is if you have the 3 branches of government each get their own executive (with the implication that the current executive / presidency also "gets" the army) as a way of further demarcating balances of power and checks and balances.

What are the 3 branches in this scenario? One cannot clearly be the executive as you're suggesting an executive of each branch
 
Top