Below is my Sunday column yesterday in the Washington Post on reforming our political system. We are certainly, as the Chinese curse says, “living in interesting times.” We seem to be in the midst of an American revolution where citizens have arisen in collective disgust of the establishment and the status quo. For years, citizens have objected to a political system that is dysfunctional and detached. The two parties have largely ignored these objections and many have objected to this “doupoly” on power. For many, answer of the two parties to the American people seems to be the same as Henry Ford to customers of the Model T Ford: “you can have any color so long as it is black.” In the United States, you can have any party so long as it is red or blue; Republican or Democrat. Yet, in 2016, the public has responded with a deafening rejection of the establishment. The most obvious is Donald Trump who is the perfect personification of an angry electorate. On the democratic side, a 74-year-old Democratic Socialist has rocked the Democratic party, which overtly rigged a primary system to guarantee the selection of the ultimate establishment figure: Hillary Clinton. However, we seem to go this cathartic exercise every four years rather than seek some changes to break down the insularity of government. There is another way. Instead of just choosing some personality that matches our angry politics, we can really change the system . . . for the better. The Framers gave the public the power to solve our own problems, including the ability to circumvent Congress with a constitutional convention. We have the anger. The question is whether we have the answer.
Below is the column. There are a host of other changes that can be made to improve the system, including many that can be down without a constitutional amendment. However, there is a value in focusing on a few basics that could have a transformative effect on the respective branches of government.
Legal scholar says we need to change the system, not just who’s in charge
America is fuming. In Super Tuesday exit polls, as many as 95 percent of Republicans and 65 percent of Democrats said they were “angry” or “dissatisfied” with the federal government. I’ve heard the same when speaking to audiences across the country. Conservatives and liberals alike talk about their frustrations with a dysfunctional political system that is unresponsive to their needs and disconnected from their lives.
Voters say they want a revolution. But that’s going to take more than electing personalities that channel our angry politics. If we want real change, we need to look at fundamental reforms to all three branches of our government.
Executive branch
First, we need to join most of the rest of the world’s democracies in moving to direct, majority-based elections of our presidents. In a late-January Washington Post-ABC News poll, 69 percent of respondents said they were “very anxious” or “somewhat anxious” about the idea of a President Donald Trump, and 51 percent said the same about a President Hillary Clinton. Yet outside a handful of swing states, most voters don’t see themselves as having much influence on the outcome of the November election. And they’re right: It’s basically impossible for Democrats to lose deep-blue states such as California or for Republicans to lose deep-red ones such as Idaho. It doesn’t help that a president can win with less than 50 percent of the popular vote, as has happened with 15 previous presidents, or by losing the popular vote altogether, as has happened four times.
We wisely got rid of the election of senators by state legislators with the enactment of the 17th Amendment in 1913. We’re overdue to abolish the electoral college. The United States should be led by a president who can garner a simple majority of votes. And if no one reaches that threshold in the general election, we should require a runoff between the two leading candidates.
Legislative branch
Despite the best efforts of the tea party and other insurgent movements, congressional incumbents maintain a death grip on their seats. Ninety-five percent of sitting congressmen and 82 percent of senators up for reelection won in 2014. They have an enormous fundraising advantage , but even more important, they are protected by how district lines are drawn.
To give voters real choices, we need a constitutional amendment barring gerrymandering of congressional districts and requiring that districts be based solely on population numbers and geographic continuity. Then we should alter our elections to allow the top two vote-getters in the primaries to run against each other in the general election, even if they’re from the same party, from a third party or are independent. While voters in Sugar Land, Tex., still might elect Republicans and voters in Chicago still might elect Democrats, they might elect different Republicans or Democrats. Moreover, in choosing between candidates of an opposing party, voters from the minority party in that district might favor a more moderate and ultimately more representative choice.
Judicial branch
We need to finally end the absurd politics of the Supreme Court, which concentrates too much power in the hands of too few justices. With such a small court, one justice can have enormous influence on rulings. That’s why the arguments in so many cases, including the Texas abortion case heard this past week, are pitched to a single swing justice. It’s why confirmations have become so traumatic, as the deadlock over the replacement of Justice Antonin Scalia vividly shows.
A larger Supreme Court would diminish the power of individual justices and increase the chances that the best legal minds could get confirmed. I’ve advocated for the expansion of the court to 19 members. That’s about the average size of a U.S. circuit court and in line with other major democracies. (Germany’s high court has 16 members, Japan’s has 15, and Britain’s has 12.)
The current size of the U.S. Supreme Court is arbitrary, related to the number of federal circuits in the late 1800s. The Constitution leaves it to Congress to determine how many justices the court needs. So we could expand through legislation rather than constitutional amendment. I’d propose ramping up gradually, preventing any president from appointing more than two justices to the new seats. And while we’re at it, we should pass legislation that allows cameras in the Supreme Court, so citizens can watch how the justices address cases that affect their lives and monitor the justices’ competence. (Advancing incapacity due to age or illness is a recurring problem on the court.)
Americans are neither irrational nor apathetic. They’re alienated, because all the branches of the U.S. government have insulated themselves from the public to a dangerous degree. Rather than treating voters like barbarians at the gate, the government should let them in and allow them a more direct and meaningful role. Now that would be a revolution worth watching.
Twitter: @JonathanTurley
Washington Post March 6, 2016
What is wrong with having a parliamentary system which decouples president/king from prime minister and almost invariably leads to compromise governing alliances of at least two parties which can then actually carry out their policies. In such systems the president/king has still the veto power. Ah, yes. I forgot. That is un-American. We know better.
Germany is actually a federation of states too. It does not function worse than our federation with its parliamentary system.
Squeeky,
So interesting what you project onto Democrats, liberals and progressives. I don’t know a single one who believes any of the things you say. Not one.
All the progressives I know want good comprehensive, mandatory sex education for ALL children. We want to reduce, (ideally to eliminate, but we are realistic), unwanted pregnancies combining sex ed with access to good, free, birth control. But then to have good accessible pre-natal care, early child care, etc. We underfund all these things to the point that our infant mortality rates look more like an under-developed nation than a developed one.
I’m not interested in any rescue fantasy, but WE built this racist society. All of us. We made sure black people couldn’t get credit, couldn’t buy a house, had to live in bad neighborhoods, had under-funded schools, couldn’t vote, and otherwise limited access in a thousand ways. We built that. So yes, we have some responsibility in fixing it. Sorry if you think otherwise, And I personally think that liberals had a part in it–take a look at George Romneys efforts as Housing Sec’y for example, but conservatives/regressives played a big role and still do.
stevegroen, Bernie just won Michigan, in spite of all projections to the contrary. I’m on board with Bernie.
PhillyT writes, “stevegroen, Bernie just won Michigan, in spite of all projections to the contrary. I’m on board with Bernie.”
The 20,000 or so more votes he received than Hillary did out of the million-odd votes is a great statement for Bernie’s campaign and Michigan labor. However, even if he wins Ohio labor vote, he won’t win the nomination because the very party that he affiliates himself with is corrupt.
He chose to run as a Democrat rather than an independent so he could get on stage, and he’s never mentioned for one moment how corrupt this nominating process is.
And the irony is that the Democratic Party base is now so far right of center that Donald Drumpf will get a lot of its votes if Hillary is not the candidate.
Like I mentioned, I hope you’ll vote for Jill if Bernie loses the nomination.
Dieter: There’s nothing wrong with a parliamentary system, but this society can’t even get over showing a woman’s nipple on television. How do you suggest we make such a change with Jesus always being ready to punish us?
We could take back our government in a heart beat if we had “no fear”. And it could be done or could have been done. All it requires is the courage to pick up the phone and give the govt a “piece of our mind”…. But ppl rightly so don’t want to ” rock the ship” for fear of retaliation. What’s the worst that can happen, you go to jail sooner than later for your beliefs? Risk it sooner you may not go to jail later. But ppl don’t call the gov….scared of being retailiated. It wasn’t gov that killed our system per se….it was cowardice and paranoia. Sure we sat back while “examples” were made….so we are to blame….but now that everyone is a felon three times a day “what difference does it make”…because we either take it back with verbal rebellion or some dick head will start bloody war. If you are pist…get the balls now to voice it….literally….cuz we are at the point voicing it is a crime. Then what. All our forebears fought for is wasted.
We can change our government without going to jail. It is totally legal and the path to do it is laid out in our Constitution. We need people like you who are passionate about change to join our discussion. Find us at unrigging america on wordpress and Facebook.
I just called him a tired old failed socialist windbag with a penchant for OPM. We call people who manipulate the system to mooch off the working classes successful socialists. To paraphrase just a touch.
@PhillyT
Believe it or not, I am more of an economic progressive. I also believe that the minimum wage needs to be a livable wage. I do think it is senseless to beef up food stamps a lot for kids, because the black welfare whores who are their mothers will just use the extra money on themselves. The problems in black America are only getting worse because we expect nothing nada zip from poor people.
That is where I disagree with Bernie. He is always talking about rich people’s responsibilities, but poor people should have responsibilities, too. But nobody asks the poor to knock off the illegitimate kid stuff, or the drug stuff. Two reasons for that.
1. The Democratic Party leadership wants blacks barefoot and pregnant so the Dems will be needed, and can therefore buy their votes.
2. The Democratic party rank and file are sooo stuck in some masturbatory fantasy about being Freedom Riders, and Mighty Whitey Saviors of the Downtrodden Blacks, that they forget to look at what’s happening. Because that good feeling is more important than reality.
I am no fan of rich folks, and think theoretically they ought to pay more in taxes, but to be honest, why at this point? The gov’t will just waste it buying more votes for the Democrats while the country goes to hell.
I don’t see any of this being fixable. Maybe when the white baby-boomer liberals all croak, there will be a chance, But not much.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squeeky
Only kidding a little. If I get to choose between raising the minimum wage to a working wage, beefing up the food stamp program so kids don’t go hungry, making sure seniors and veterans have enough to get by, versus more wars, more tax cuts for billionaires, more corporate welfare…it’s a very easy decision. I’m with Bernie. We call rich people who manipulate the system “clever” and good business people, and we call poor people who manipulate the system moochers. Well, it’s just the other way around and the wealthy steal WAAAAAAYYYY more.
PhillyT writes, “If I get to choose between raising the minimum wage to a working wage, beefing up the food stamp program so kids don’t go hungry, making sure seniors and veterans have enough to get by, versus more wars, more tax cuts for billionaires, more corporate welfare…it’s a very easy decision. I’m with Bernie. We call rich people who manipulate the system ‘clever’ and good business people, and we call poor people who manipulate the system moochers. Well, it’s just the other way around and the wealthy steal WAAAAAAYYYY more.”
Makes sense to me, and I hope you’ll vote for Jill Stein when the Democratic Party’s superdelegated nominee is Clinton.
@personnong
IDK. Maybe guillotines are where to begin???
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Voters Want A Revolution. Here’s What It Would Take.
In a perfect nation, a nation where rule of law had not been supplanted by arbitrary rule of man (tyranny) the first order of the day would be accountability.
Failure to hold the criminals operating within the US government responsible for kidnapping, indefinite detention without charge, torture, wholly elective wars based upon lies, war profiteering, theft of trillions of US dollars in various control fraud schemes, creation of the total surveillance state, the deaths of millions of innocent persons through sanctions/war (etal) would only further weaken what remains of the constitutional foundation upon which the proposed changes would be erected.
The manifest crimes committed by the US government are a complete departure from it’s raison d’etre and any reasonable person in a just world would call into question it’s continued existence in current unconstitutional tyranical form.
Accountability is where to begin.
Accountability is important but, at this moment we are more concerned about the future than in errors of the past that we cannot correct. We want to be certain that our elected representatives know that without a doubt they are answerable to us. We badly need electoral reform to make this happen. You can find us at unrigging america on wordpress and Facebook. We hope you will contribute your thoughts and will help us effect the sort of change you want.
@PhillyT
I don’t think you are kidding. . .
https://pansiesforplato.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/berniegoesghetto.jpg?w=640
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Whoa! What a coincidence!
George Soros just called me on my secret Obamaphone and told me that if I wanted in on the free money he and Bernie were going to socialist-steal from Adelson and Trump and other hard working Waltons, that I would have to go to one of those FEMA camps and learn the secret mooslim anti-cplonial handshake from reverend Wright and Bill Ayers and get the secret Alinsky password to get me out of being conscripted by the UN Agenda 21 “peace-keepers”. If you know what I mean! It’s gonna be so great. Free food stamp lobster for everyone!
Another great way to improve the system is use much more “referendum voting” so voters can set the priorities for the politicians to follow.
The current system allows the politicians to play sort of a shell game. If there is an idea they don’t like (ex: consumption tax or instant runoff voting), the politicians find a radical candidate that can’t win to support it. The radical candidate essentially kills the idea.
Referendum voting puts that power in the hands of the voters, most vote by party anyway, not for individual candidates.
That’s one idea. Please join our discussion of electoral reform at unrigging america on wordpress and Facebook. To effect change we need people like you.
Not as long as money is free speech with direct access to campaigns, candidates, elected officials, hired and appointed officials and regulation writers and specifically allowed for those entities that have no vote.
Not as long as citizens are denied control over government specifically recall up to and including their State Delegates to the central government
Not as long as long as huge segments of the population are disenfranchised by a one party system – a coalition of the left – ranging from Republican- RINOS as the right wing of the left and the Democrats of whatever position as the left wing of the left AND the center as the center of the LEFT instead of the Constitution
Not as long as solo rogue Judges get to change the Constitution without using the Amendment process.
Not as long as the Bill of Rights is suspended.
Fix those for starters then maybe government could work again.
Easier to have the military uphold their oath of office.
Our government is fixable and the Constitution provides the ground rules. Please join our discussion at unrigging america on wordpress and Facebook. We would welcome your input.
Government’s most important and simplest task is providing safe roads, safe bridges, safe drinking water, trash pickup and police protection.
In places like Flint and Ferguson, government can’t even provide these basic services, but those same governments have ample tax payer dollars for a total surveillance society violating the U.S. Constitution – designed to “restrain” government actions.
Maybe if both parties worked for their own citizens, instead of oligarchs that bribe them – maybe government could work again?
Change is possible. We are trying to start a discussion that will lead to a path forward. You can find us at unrigging america on wordpress and facebook. Your voice is needed and we hope you will join us.
All it takes is an amendment. SCOTUS ruled on that back in the days of the Contract with America. Plonked it. But the tie in with Obamacare is a heavy heavy anchor….
Term limits, 2 terms no more, no pensions, no perks and by all means they must all be covered under Obacalacare.
The voters do not need a revolution. They need square guys and gals to run for office and not be owned by the Koch Brothers.
Elmer Fudd – George Soros is spending money hand over foot. The Koch brothers have been tight fisted so far.
All we need is for the law to apply equally to the governed and the governing alike. The need is not to change the constitution at all! There is too much corruption in government and no real accountability and no constitutional change can fix that, but would only make it worse!
As for tying most of the comments in with the question.. What drivel. 95% will still vote left wing fascist socialist of those stupid enough to support a one party system of government. I’d rather be ex patria and a real citizen of the USA than settle for all shit and no shinola.
@Darren at 6:01 – Living in California as I do, it’s really disappointing to see the choices for the nominees whittled down before we have our primary.
There’s also the winner-take-all aspect of both the primary and electoral colleges. There are more moderates and conservatives in CA than there are liberals, but because of that winner-take-all aspect, the slightly left-of-center total accrues to the left. The “top two” primary system has produced elections where both candidates in the general were from the same party (Democrats), but have also been less partisan and hewed closer to the center than would otherwise be the case.
Olly made his point. Shadow ignored the validity.