And again, this is not a problem with “old people in office”, it’s a problem with our shitty rules and procedures. Can something like that even happen in a parliamentary system?
Americans like to imagine that we have an awesome constitution and form of government, but the evidence suggests otherwise.
(Admittedly, improving voting is a much easier fix than improving our overall system, as the former could be done mostly with no changes to the constitution.)
The particular issue of needing a specific Senator to vote for judicial appointments doesn’t happen in Canada or the UK, because appointments are entirely an executive matter. Neither House of Parlement needs to consent (limiting my answer to Canada and UK because those are the two I’m familiar with). Nor is a parliamentary vote needed for confirming military appointments, so no Tuberville play, nor for any executive branch appointments.
As well, individuel MPs aren’t as powerful, so again, no Tuberville play.
With respect to incumbency in general, it’s not a problem because we only get one vote, for the local member. In casting that vote, we consider the party policies and the leader. Even if I like the local member and think they’re doing a good job, that could get outweighed if I don’t like the party they’re with, or the leader of that party.
Overall, that means no individual incumbency factor. If there’s a collective desire to change government, gov’t MPs will lose, because that’s how we change the gov’t.
Just as a side bar, there’s no discussion of term limits for MPs that I’ve heard, because our electoral system doesn’t have an individual incumbency factor.
Depends on the rules. I live in Luxembourg, which has a unicameral parliament. This body is entirely uninvolved in selection and appointment of judges. The judiciary is completely independent, including in staffing its benches.
The process is complex, but basically there’s a commission of active judges which evaluates candidates based on various factors including professional background, law school scores, and other considerations. Every candidate gets a score, and the list ranks all candidates by this score. When a vacancy opens, the next candidate is picked from the top of the list (approximately; it’s complicated).
In a very simplified sense, the judges themselves maintain the backlog of who they say is qualified to join their ranks, and when one is needed, the appointment happens more or less automatically.
This obviously means that judicial culture is effectively insulated from outside interference; the upside is protection from political manipulation, while the downside is inertia against evolution. But elected officials certainly can’t game the judiciary like in the US.
Forgot to add: there’s no seniority system for committees. Committee membership is decided by the leadership of each party, in consultation with caucus.
While it isn’t as iron clad as it used to be, seniority still plays a large (if less formal) role in determining who will serve on which committees, as well as who will chair committees and subcommittees. There are differences between Republican and Democratic Conference rules, as well as for different committees.
To me the problem is that it’s old. It’s the oldest active codified constitution in the world. It was pretty great when it was written compared to other governments, and was good enough to outlast every other one (the average constitution lasts 19 years), but other nations have come up some pretty innovative stuff in the past 234 years.
One of the reasons why it has lasted is because it can be amended. Since it can change, we’ve been able to make some improvements over the years and haven’t had to chuck the whole thing out and start over.
But in our current political climate, we struggle to even get routine things done. Feinstein is forced to stay in her position when she should have retired long ago, or Biden can’t even appoint judges. I’m sure that Mitch is clinging onto his position by his fingernails for similar reasons (the Republicans would lose some important clout in the Senate). Making major changes to our constitution that would ease these issues is impossible right now. The government is basically trapped.
It’s enough to almost feel sorry for Mitch. (But I don’t.)
On the other hand, we’ve only had one amendment passed in the last fifty years, and that was an administrative change, affecting when pay increases for Congress are enacted.
I suspect that the reason for this lack of new amendments is, as you note:
One could say that our system under our Constitution is like the cardiac system of an old person who’s not living a healthy life: clogged with built-up atherosclerotic blockages and headed for a major heart attack.
I do hope he can hang on through the budget negotiations. He’s been at it long enough to have learned that in spite of how much their base loves government shut downs, overall they are bad for the Republican party (as well as bad for the country but that is an afterthought). The last thing we need right now is a, more MAGA than thou leadership fight right in the middle of a budget crisis.
Ahem.
I did not say oldest period. It’s the oldest codified constitution. San Marino’s government was overhauled in 1974 with the Declaration of Citizen Rights. I was pretty careful with my qualifiers.
Aren’t we ALWAYS in a “budget crisis” these days? As soon as one gets resolved, it seems there is another one right around the corner.
If there were a “crisis”, maybe they coulda cut their month-long vacation short or something!
I’d be happy to hear Mitch dropped dead right now, over the hopes that he would usher the Senate past some self-inflicted situation sometime in the future.
So, Mumblin’ Mitch has a whole list of things he’s not afflicted with.
Maybe he just likes to stop and think a lot? Maybe holding a internal monlogue with his invisible 4th-wall viewers, except that the in-scene activity doesn’t freeze like it’s supposed to?
I think it’s actually worse that he does NOT have any of these things. I’d be somewhat sympathetic if he was suffering from Absence Seizures.
Now though? We know there is something VERY wrong with him, but nobody can tell what it is.
Didn’t they say it could well be the aftermath of his concussion?
It was implied:
Last week, Dr. Monahan released a short letter the day after the incident that said he’d consulted with McConnell and conferred with his neurology team and that the GOP leader was medically cleared to work. “Occasional lightheadedness is not uncommon in concussion recovery and can also be expected as a result of dehydration,” the letter said.
Color me skeptical.
Sounds to me more like “we’ve seen compelling evidence that we have mice, but as of this moment the traps are all still empty.”
Too many tests are either snapshots of a moment in time or cover a relatively short period of time that renders them fairly insensitive.
If I randomly looked outside thrice yesterday, I would likely have concluded that it hadn’t rained.
But the patio was wet.
Hmmmmm.
IANAD.
As I said, we often know more about what’s not happening than what is. I think that was released by McDonnell’s office, so it might not be complete.
One thing I’ll add, is that fluid balance can be fairly narrow in the elderly. Managing, for example, high blood pressure, heart disease and renal problems can make the goldilocks spot hard to find.
Yeah, me too.
He’s just fine, thanks. Completely recovered from his summer health issues.
The health issues he denied having last summer.
But no need to talk about those health issues.
He’s just fine.