I just had a thought

[Freenhult]

Wait...Why isn't there? That would be a good thing to have. Too bad it would never pass Congress....

[Gen. Volkov]

Not to mention that unless an congressman really screws the pooch, they will probably get re-elected. There's a 97% incumbency rate. Alot of that is probably that there is so much more funding available to people who have already won though. But yeah, term limits would be nice, that would cut down on the number of senators and congressmen who die in office.

You just hit the nail on the head Freen, Congress makes the laws, so they are never going to make a law that makes them leave office.

[edit: double post, combined the two]

[Ruddertail]

Mmmph... It'd have to be a consitutional ammendment, since otherwise, some later congress would just come along and repeal it.

Is there a way of totally bypassing congress for an ammendment? I thought there was...

2 terms, max. Seperated by 1 - 3 terms, then a chance to serve another 2 terms... Good people can be reelected again, but other people would get a chance to get in there, as well...

[Gen. Volkov]

I don't think there's any way to do that. But I could be wrong. 2 terms sounds like a good interval to me, just like the president. Of course that means we'd have a brand new House every four years. Maybe a few more terms than that for the House. But 2 is good for the Senate.

[Freenhult]

Yeah...A constitutional convention...But last time we had one of those we had a bit of a government change.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituti ... meeting%29

[Ruddertail]

Meh, could be... I thought there was something specified in the consitution for the ammendment process... Could be not.

Anyway, maybe 3 for the House, so they could stagger them? 1/3 new house every 2 years. Representatives shouldn't serve too long, though - they're meant to be closer to a direct democracy, voting for what the people want atm, while the senate is more of a stabalizing influence...

[Freenhult]

Yeah...There are two ways to change the constitution. One is the main way, the second is more like a last resort if the government gets all dumb. The main way is to have 2/3 of both houses of Congress pass the bill...and the amendment to the Constitution must be ratified by 3/4 of either the state legislatures, or by constitutional conventions specially elected in each of the states, before it can come into effect.

[Gen. Volkov]

3 or 4 would be good for the House. But even though they are supposed to be closer to the people, replacing half the house every 2 years would be a bit much I think. So A staggered cycle of 1/3 or 1/4 replaced every 2 years would be better. Of course there is a problem that when the congressmen are in their last term, they'd have no real accountability. They wouldn't get re-elected anyway, so you'd have the same sort of situation we have with Bush right now. He knows this is his last term, so he's going to pursue all the unpopular stuff that would have made him unelectable after his first term.

[Ruddertail]

I mentioned stagger, though it might not have been clear...

Also, no, no real accountability, unless they want to be elected again in another 3 terms or so. But 1/3 - 1/4 of either the house or senate isn't going to be able to go off and do a bunch of dumb stuff, the other 2/3 - 3/4 will still have accountability, and will need to restrain the others to avoid being dumped themselvs...

[The Beatles]

You three are nicely rediscovering what Yes, Minister said in the 80s. Don't want to spoil the surprise (watch some episodes!) but essentially speaking the world has not yet come up with a truly acceptable form of large-scale government. The only reason governments work is because people adapt quickly, very quickly.

[Freenhult]

Thats comforting...We are on the same track as a TV show. O_o

Oh well...Funny though.

[The Beatles]

May I add, a highly intelligent TV show, of the ones I've seen my definite favourite. Only Fools and Horses comes close to the title, but Yes Minister is almost incomparable for wit and wisdom.

[Gen. Volkov]

*Nod* But the one that comes closest is a democracy. Actually we are all rediscovering what Arthur C. Clark said back in in the 60's. *laughs*. He said, and I quote: "Communism is the best form of government, unfortunately it is only workable in robots." That's from 3001: Final Odyssey, but it reflects earlier statements he made about government.

Also, no, no real accountability, unless they want to be elected again in another 3 terms or so. But 1/3 - 1/4 of either the house or senate isn't going to be able to go off and do a bunch of dumb stuff, the other 2/3 - 3/4 will still have accountability, and will need to restrain the others to avoid being dumped themselvs...

That will mitigate it some. But the House and senate will become much more lively places I bet.

I mentioned stagger, though it might not have been clear...

You mean 1/3-1/4 every 6-8 years then?

I'm gonna have to see that show at some point, it sounds great. Not in the same vein, but how would you compare it to Monty Python's Flying Circus?

[The Beatles]

Well, Clarke made one succinct statement; Yes Minister made hundreds of concrete statements, illustrating the pitfalls of various systems through hilarious comedy.

[Gen. Volkov]

That's actually just the only statement I remember. He may have much more to say in the subject. But I think I've seen examples of that sort of comedy in various forms. I saw a cartoon one about how different systems treat the ownership of a cow.