discussion What should Americans do to fix their messy electoral system?

[Vermouth]

3 minutes ago, John Slayne said:

the UK is not really a good model for functioning democracy lol, we still have a KING (that can, contrary to popular belief, lobby the government without our knowledge as he is exempt from FOI requests)

 

on top of that, we have an unelected 2nd chamber (Lords) that includes hereditary peers and lords spiritual (the only other ocuntry to have permanent religious representation in the legislative body is Iran)

 

the UK 'democracy' is a total mess, maybe even more so than in the US

Yes, crazy about the house of Lords  etc and it should go but a bit of context: they can only delay a bill for one year ( and that can be overruled by the elected House of Commons ), have no power over finance bills ( taxes etc), and no power over their own fate ( so they cannot stop their own abolition). It's a silly old vestige but it doesn't have real power if the representatives elected by the people overrule them.

 

Also the 1689 Bill of Rights established principle that the King is only the King because Parliament ( so in the 21st Century the elected House of Commons) says he is.

[John Slayne]

7 minutes ago, Vermouth said:

Yes, crazy about the house of Lords  etc and it should go but a bit of context: they can only delay a bill for one year ( and that can be overruled by the elected House of Commons ), have no power over finance bills ( taxes etc), and no power over their own fate ( so they cannot stop their own abolition). It's a silly old vestige but it doesn't have real power if the representatives elected by the people overrule them.

 

Also the 1689 Bill of Rights established principle that the King is only the King because Parliament ( so in the 21st Century the elected House of Commons) says he is.

that does not change anything about what i have said 

[noodlelymph]

The US populace is completely incapable of doing anything good for themselves anymore… spineless, spoiled, genocidal, pathetic country 

[Vermouth]

15 minutes ago, The7thStranger said:

Thanks so much for the explanation! I had this vision in my head of a bottleneck issue, where you can shove politicans through the opening but you can pretty much never get them out again. I think it's still there to some extent, but not to the extreme degree that I had imagined.

Actually one of the big plusses of the present system is the very very direct accountability at every election.

 

Take Liz Truss, who was briefly Prime Minister in 2022, before resigning as the result of a whole load of issues: she was MP for a very very safe constituency and had an enormous majority vote in her constituency in the election of 2019, however, the voters in that constituency were so angry with her they threw her out in July, and elected someone else from a different political party. Even the most powerful can fall to the voters in such a direct system which is much much more difficult (read 99.9999% impossible) in a proportional party list system where she would be close to the top of the list.

Edited October 22 by Vermouth

[Vermouth]

2 minutes ago, John Slayne said:

that does not change anything about what i have said 

Probably not, but it's not quite the total basket case I think you were making it out to be.

 

 

[John Slayne]

2 minutes ago, Vermouth said:

Probably not, but it's not quite the total basket case I think you were making it out to be.

 

 

as a European immigrant living in the UK, it is to me

 

[ZeroSuitBritney]

End the two party fascist system.

[Vermouth]

1 hour ago, John Slayne said:

as a European immigrant living in the UK, it is to me

 

Well as I've said it needs reform, and if it were up to me I'd have something like the German system which is mixed voting districts/proportional lists. I'd certainly abolish the House  of Lords too ( starting with the ridiculous bishops). But as I've pointed out in reality they don't have much power.  

 

The thing about monarchy is it's equally ridiculous of course per se,  but what do you replace it with? You'd end up with some non entity of a retired party political hack, which wouldn't necessarily be any better in practice than what you've got now.  I'm not saying it could never be replaced but serious thought would have to be as to what would in reality actually follow and what they would do.

Moaning that you don't know what Charles is talking to Starmer about once a week is not the basis of serious constitutional reform is it?
 

 

However, for all the present system's faults, we at least manage to have genuinely free and fair elections in which the people in power have to account for their actions on a regular basis, and can and are (see July) thrown out by the voters if they aren't happy.

Edited October 22 by Vermouth

[Vermouth]

6 minutes ago, ZeroSuitBritney said:

End the two party fascist system.

Well that's it then. What a tour de force of constitutional thought that comment is.

 

 

 

[Cyanide]

******* ban lobbying and start working for the people instead of corporations