Can go wrong there. But to take it a further step, have politicians be conscripted from the general population, that way everybody would have to know something about civics in order to perform their civic duty.
I have always considered this a very interesting idea for the House of Representatives. Congresspeople chosen by lottery, based on congressional districts. No elections, no campaigns, and probably a better sample of people actually representative of the areas they come from. There would have to be a way to handle situations in which people were unwilling or unable to serve, but I suspect there would be a way. The whole idea is probably unworkable, but its worth talking about.
I would not support this idea for the Senate. As rather a Hamiltonian federalist, I'd like to see the US go back to the pre-17th Amendment world in which State Senators were not directly elected.
I would also repeal the 22nd amendment limiting Presidents to two terms. In fact, as long as we elect officials, I'd eliminate all term limits at all levels. The whole notion of limiting the right of the people to vote for somebody just because he has served a set number of years is one of the most misguided and anti-democratic ideas there can be. In the real world, experience is important.
While we are on the subject, I would favor an amendment to make it much harder to amend the constitution. Far too many amendments are proposed for very specific causes like "right to life" or "defense of marriage" or to supposeldly solve specific problems a segment of the society sees as important. To me, a proposal to amend our basic law should have to go through a long period of review and approval (to eliminate flash-in-the-pan causes like prohibition and ensure that it has legs through over the long haul). In this regard, I would require that no proposed amendment could take effect less than 10 years after it was initially approved by congress, even if it met all other requirements for ratification. I would also specify that both the states or congress could easily reverse their earlier votes to approve an amendment at any time during this 10 year period. This would give the nation a chance to reconsider hasty moves that seemed good at the time.
