Reforming Uncle Sam
The Electoral College (Keep It, but Reform It)
Critics of the Electoral College maintain that it is archaic, a constitutional appendage left over from America’s founding when communication and transportation made direct election of the president impractical. Why, they ask, should the United States keep such a relic in the information age?
I'll explain why ...
Read the rest of this entry »
Read the rest of this entry »
Hyperbole and Nastiness: Politics (American Style), and What to do About It
All of the hysteria over the health care debate made me, I confess, a little nuts. Not as nuts as those people who feel compelled to hurl epithets and bricks at Members of Congress, but a little nuts all the same.
As a colleague of mine points out, there are two ways to respond to actions one disagrees with—assume that one’s opponent is mistaken, or assume that they are evil.
Read the rest of this entry »
Read the rest of this entry »
Campaign Finance Reform: Taxing and Redistributing Campaign Contributions
We need a sensible campaign finance system that encourages competitive elections and respects the rights of campaign contributors.
The current campaign finance system is a byzantine, convoluted, ill-conceived, nonsensical, patched and re-patched, ineffective, embarrassing mess. Just take a look at the Federal Election Commission’s website along with two aspirin and call your doctor in the morning if the headache persists.
This is a system that only Rube Goldberg would be proud of.
Read the rest of this entry »
Read the rest of this entry »
The U.S. Senate: Undemocratic and Anachronistic (Convert It into a U.S. House of Lords)
I have an offbeat proposal which I borrow from the British Parliament. How about turning the Senate into an American version of the House of Lords?
Now, wait a second, before you tune me out, I’m not proposing that we create hereditary privileges (by the way that is forbidden by the Constitution anyhow).
What I am proposing is that we institutionalize an award of service to the nation and take advantage of the input of citizens of the United States who have done great things in the service of their country but who are unlikely to get involved in politics.
Read the rest of this entry »
Read the rest of this entry »
When Founders’ Envy becomes Political Obstruction
Asked to write about the most troubling feature of our national politics, I have considered many inviting targets---the filibuster and the Senate, the Supreme Court and the (ab-)use of judicial review, the constantly expanding modern presidency all come to mind---but in starting to write about any of these possible topics, I was struck again and again by the following inescapable fact:
that we can’t make an argument about any of these things without having to thrash through well-worn and largely irresolvable debates about what the “Founders Fathers” did, or did not, think about the practice in question.
Read the rest of this entry »
Read the rest of this entry »
Adopt Presidential Question Time Like the Brits: Just the Facts, Please
I should like to associate myself with the remarks offered last February by Joseph Lane on the suggestion that some form of presidential “Question Time” be made a regular part of the American legislative process. But if question time is to serve any of the high-minded purposes that Mr. Lane discussed it cannot be simply an unmoderated debate, where anyone – and, please bear in mind, these are politicians we are talking about – can make any factual claim he thinks he can get away with.
Read the rest of this entry »
Read the rest of this entry »
Keep the Bum In: Repeal the Twenty-second Amendment
Be it resolved, the Twenty-second Amendment, limiting a president to two terms in office (or a maximum of 10 years as president), is the most vindictive, ill-conceived, anti-democratic constitutional ever adopted.
Here's why we should repeal it.
Read the rest of this entry »
Read the rest of this entry »
Fast Approaching Worstest: What’s Wrong with Washington—10 Questions for Political Satirist Will Durst
How to reform the federal government? "Move it to Iowa. D.C. was built on a swamp, and apparently it still has major suckage."
So says Will Durst, who calls himself “a Midwestern baby boomer with a media-induced identity crisis.” For its part, the New York Times calls him “quite possibly the best political satirist working in the country today.”
He joins us for our forum on federal politics—and no one emerges unscathed.
Read the rest of this entry »
Read the rest of this entry »
Kermit Roosevelt III Replies to Larry Sabato: Reforming the U.S. Supreme Court
Professor Sabato is known for provocative suggestions to reform the Constitution, but I think this one is not nearly as radical as it might seem at first blush.
In fact, I think it would tend to make the Supreme Court more like the institution the Founders created.
Read the rest of this entry »
Read the rest of this entry »
The U.S. Supreme Court: Reforming the Least Democratic Branch
The U.S. Supreme Court is neither democratic nor easily changed, to some Americans’ delight and others’ dismay. No one would seriously propose that we elect Justices—just take a look at the tawdry contests in states that put their supreme courts and various judicial posts on the ballot.
But is the third federal branch so perfect that it is immune from reform?
Read the rest of this entry »
Read the rest of this entry »
Britannica Blog Categories
- 5 Questions
- Ask an Editor
- Britannica Top 10s
- Picture of the Day
- Special Features
- 2010 Year in Review
- 2012 Year in Review
- American Civil War Sesquicentennial
- Book Excerpts
- Brave New Classroom 2.0
- California's Prop 19
- Diana & the Cult of Celebrity
- Environment Week 2011
- Facts That Matter
- Founders & Faith
- How Now, Great Books?
- Learning & Literacy
- Multitasking
- Newspapers & the Net
- Reagan 100th Birthday Forum
- Reforming Uncle Sam
- September 11 attacks 10th anniversary
- Target Iran?
- The Obama Presidency
- Web 2.0
- Women's History Month 2011
- World at 7 Billion
- Your Brain Online
- 2010 Year in Review