Hmm, Yes I do believe I read something on that. Do you know what the rational was for the switch?
I don't, but what I do know is that other states made adustments too around the same time.
Hmm, Yes I do believe I read something on that. Do you know what the rational was for the switch?
So... Bump
Thoughts? Ideas? Proto-TLs? Rants about the stupidity and absurdity of the idea?
Come on, an attempt at a discussion of monumental changes in the political system of a major world power can't be the dullest thing I've posted.![]()
The PoD for this is that Horatio Gates died at Saratoga (a PoD I'm somewhat fond of).
OK, lets say that war hero Benedict Arnold is in favor of the multi-person Presidency, and he, Franklin, and others persuade enough people that it gets put into the constitution. The First Triumvirate consists of George Washington (State), John Adams (Treasury) and Benedict Arnold (Attorney General). How do the first four years look?
It is interesting but I think that the parties would be likely to run their candidates as teams IE a Clinton, Bush, Cheney or Bush, Kerry, Edwards administration. Also how do you deal with someone campaigning for Domestic President on purpose instead of FP and losing? Also how long is one HoS? Does one serve as it for a term and then return to run for FP/DP again? Does one automatically get promoted or is FP/DP just a requirement for those that want to run for HoS?My idea would be for a rotating presidenty, with elections 3-years apart and you would have three 'roles'; Head of State, Foregin President and Domestic President, they would all have a equal vote and but the FP would frame the debate for foreign affairs and as would the DP for domestic affairs.
The elections would work by having a two man races, as the US has presently, the victor would become FP and the looseer DP... the FP would then be 'groomed' for the HoS role... in another three years the FP becomes Hos and you have fresh elections for a new FP & DP.
It would run like this;
Clinton as Head of State
Bush as Foreign President (Victor in the election)
Gore as Domestic President (Runner up in the election)
Then in three years Clinton retires and you have;
Bush as Head of State
Kerry as Foreign President (Victor in the election)
McCanin (?) as Domestic President (Runner up in the election)
So what do you guys think?
It is interesting but I think that the parties would be likely to run their candidates as teams IE a Clinton, Bush, Cheney or Bush, Kerry, Edwards administration. Also how do you deal with someone campaigning for Domestic President on purpose instead of FP and losing? Also how long is one HoS? Does one serve as it for a term and then return to run for FP/DP again? Does one automatically get promoted or is FP/DP just a requirement for those that want to run for HoS?
I think it would be interesting and possibly more efficient. As you could elect people on their core competences and views instead of taking the good with the bad as you do with the current system. The question is exactly how you would split up the powers and deal with conflict. If your domestic leader is Pro-Choice and Gay Rights and your AG is Pro-Life/Anti-Gay Rights how do you deal with the former pushing for laws to protect choice/gay marriage while the latter appoints justices and judges who will overturn them? Or where is the line between Justice, Foreign and Domestic? Which does the FBI fall under? It is part of the intelligence community but operates only within the US and pursues criminals. Or in the military. Where does the Militia/National Guard fall? Who prepares the budget request for domestic military functions( DARPA, the Academies, Base construction etc.) or military affairs in general? Do trade regulations fall under the domestic or foreign realm?I haven't quite thought this through yet, but interestingly enough if one was to have a tripartite presidency divided by roles, the roles could actually get specific powers of the presidency. The foreign policy president could actually get the power to negotiate and sign treaties, deploy the military, appoint generals, etc. The domestic policy president could have the appointive powers over the executive branch excluding everything with a seat in the NSA (the NSA becoming the foreign policy president's cabinet, essentially). But more importantly the domestic policy president would have the power of the veto, submit the executive branch's budgets to Congress, respond to domestic emergencies, and handle the economic issues because it would be he who would have the relationship to Treasury or the Fed. What other people are calling the Head of State president could also be the constitutional president or the structural president or the legal president: he would have only one cabinet officer responsive to him, the Attorney General. He would have the power to appoint members of the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts, and through the Attorney General he would have the right to file suit in domestic and international courts. His powers would be less flashy, but the compensation for that would be the duration of his influence, as the federal courts have huge influence over the policy decisions of the whole goverment.
What do you think?