John Adams Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Most people liked the idea of the direct democracy, which surprised me, but I think Gavin summed it up well when he said (paraphrasing), "I know the current system is FUBAR. A new one can't help but be better." Anyway, having given the power of the legislature more directly to the people, how do we arrange other branches of government? Is an executive necessary? And if so, what powers does the executive have? And how about judiciary? Do they maintain the same check on the legislative branch that they have now? Still appointed by the president? I favor an executive who is a head of state, with limited war time/crisis powers that are as answerable to the people as the legislature is in our direct democracy system. If the pres decides to go to war and the people oppose it, tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 I favor an executive who is a head of state, with limited war time/crisis powers that are as answerable to the people as the legislature is in our direct democracy system. If the pres decides to go to war and the people oppose it, tough. 256626[/snapback] Works for me. I also think we need a judiciary. It will be another check and balance to the legislature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Works for me. I also think we need a judiciary. It will be another check and balance to the legislature. 256638[/snapback] We don't nee a legislature, just an elected head of state with limited powers and a judiciary appointed directly by the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 We don't nee a legislature, just an elected head of state with limited powers and a judiciary appointed directly by the people. 256700[/snapback] Who writes the legislation? I don't care how good of a constitution you have, there will always be tweeks needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Who writes the legislation? I don't care how good of a constitution you have, there will always be tweeks needed. 256729[/snapback] I'll do it. Of course, each will contain a rider that says something to the effect of "People who piss me off will be terminated without prejudice." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Instead of an executive and a legislature, I'd scrap both and go with a ruling council. Set term limits at 10 years, and make it illegal for any members of the council to profit from their office. They could get a stipend for the rest of their lives and be exempt from taxes, something like that...but you need to remove the incentive for those who only wish to serve to get rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 I'll do it. Of course, each will contain a rider that says something to the effect of "People who piss me off will be terminated without prejudice." 256790[/snapback] Let me guess, your vote for the "Type of Government" was Authoritarian, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Let me guess, your vote for the "Type of Government" was Authoritarian, right? 256809[/snapback] There is something romantic about my benevolent dictatorship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 There is something romantic about my benevolent dictatorship. 256961[/snapback] Is that what they are calling it nowadays? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted March 1, 2005 Author Share Posted March 1, 2005 Instead of an executive and a legislature, I'd scrap both and go with a ruling council. Set term limits at 10 years, and make it illegal for any members of the council to profit from their office. They could get a stipend for the rest of their lives and be exempt from taxes, something like that...but you need to remove the incentive for those who only wish to serve to get rich. 256799[/snapback] So is the "check" on this the legislature (And the people)? To the others, would you agree that the president should have more limited powers than he currently has? I would make him be the head of state (diplomacy). Give him the ability to negotiate treaties that must ultimately get approval in the legislative branch (this is touchy because it undermines the pres. authority, but tough)? And what role would the judiciary have? Similar to what it is now- enforcement of the Constitution and federal laws? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 So is the "check" on this the legislature (And the people)? To the others, would you agree that the president should have more limited powers than he currently has? I would make him be the head of state (diplomacy). Give him the ability to negotiate treaties that must ultimately get approval in the legislative branch (this is touchy because it undermines the pres. authority, but tough)? And what role would the judiciary have? Similar to what it is now- enforcement of the Constitution and federal laws? 256989[/snapback] The judiciary is for exactly what you mentioned - enforcement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts