Were it not for the Electoral College, we would not have been stuck with Trump. There is no question about that. But even without that we would still be stuck with gridlock. We are polarized. That polarization is not about how, collectively, the American people feel. That is how we are organized.
We have a two party system. If we had a multiparty system representing the entire spectrum of American political philosophies then there would be more negotiation and compromise. That just doesn't work in our current form of government. Intentionally or not our system of choosing our leaders is organized in such a way that the most a third party can do is screw things up for the party they are closest to in beliefs. The election of 2000 was one such example.
What is the alternative? How about the parliamentary system?
It can be just as ugly and absurd as our own system. There is no question about that. But it has the advantage of making multiple parties and therefore multiple points of view viable. And in a country as diverse as the United States that is important.
You would no longer vote directly for the President. You would vote for your local representative. And the collection of local representatives would select the president. In a diverse collection of representatives, that president may well be a compromise. I do see some features of our current system that could be maintained.
The presidency continues to be for a fixed term, as are the terms of the elected representatives.
The President is still limited to two terms.
The legislature continues to be bicameral, with a House and Senate. The major parties would tend to dominate the Senate but the House could end up being quite diverse.
And then the changes...
Only the House would be involved in selecting the President and Vice President. Either of them could be sitting members of the House or Senate, or someone from the outside. They could be a sitting cabinet member, a prior cabinet member, the sitting President or Vice President (provided they have not already served two terms), or anyone else that the House chooses.
Any person entered for consideration would need to sponsored by at least 5 percent of the House. They would be required to completely open their finances to a House committee. They would also be evaluated for a security clearance. The purpose of the committee would be only to eliminate those unfit for the office due to criminal activity, finances that would subject them to undue influence, conflict of interest, or the inability to be granted the highest level of security clearance. And the reasons for them being disallowed would have to be published.
The Vice President would be a real chair of the Senate. The position would have no votes except to break a tie, but actually running the Senate and enforcing the rules would be their only job. Their job would not be to carry water for the President. And if the President dies in office, then the Vice President would be a caretaker in the position, but only until the House fills that position again. The newly elected President would serve out the term of the deceased President.
Would this work? I think it could. Would this be better? At this point, I do think so. There are genuine conservatives in the county, and as much as I disagree with them, their voices deserve to be heard. There are also out and out fascists. And while I think they should rot in hell at least they would be separated from the real conservatives. Think Lincoln Project vs Trumpists.
Some of those of us on the left would likely join with some of the more centrists from the conservatives to form a more vaguely liberal party. The rest of us on the left would be something more like Democratic Socialists.
Might there be other flavors? Sure, and I don't have a problem with that. The point is, everyone's view is represented and negotiation and compromise is restored to the system.
