# What would you change about the US government if you could start from scratch? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 21, 2015, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268 "2015-02-21T17:16:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/41 "2015-02-22T04:43:08Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > One man, one vote. No voter should be allowed to vote twice. One vote per lifetime? That seems a tad limited. Where are voters allowed to vote more than once in an election? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/42 "2015-02-22T04:51:13Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > I have a better idea: if somebody wants to activate the draft, _shoot him_. Make the activation of the draft contingent on the execution of every politician who voted in favour of it. If they’re not willing to lay down their own lives to make it happen, circumstances clearly aren’t dire enough to justify bringing back slavery. I appreciate your sentiment, but it’s a little unfair to balance risk with death. We expect those politicians have family and friends who will be affected. I don’t have any problem with further increasing the difficulty of declaring war though. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/43 "2015-02-22T04:58:09Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > You can say it, but that doesn’t make it fucking true. Your electoral system has an inherent tendency towards a two party system by introducing the problem of spoilers: if 60% of the electorate supports Adam becoming president and also supports Bob becoming president, one of those two candidates should win. There should be no situation in which Charlie wins with only 40% support, but that is what can happen if you force people to arbitrarily split their vote between two equally good candidates instead of using a voting system that more accurately reflects the preferences of the electorate. > > Even if you can’t understand that, the fact that the Republicans and the Democrats have been allowed to take control of the presidential debates and actively bar other parties from participating should be a conflict of interest that even you can recognise. And you can say it, but that doesn’t make it fucking true backatcha. The Democrats and the Republicans didn’t just happen to become the two big mainstream parties. They got there by finding out what the political views were of the overwhelming majority of voters and then embracing those political views. The reason libertarian principles don’t win elections isn’t because the system is rigged. It’s because ninety-nine percent of the voters in this country don’t agree with libertarian principles. And no tinkering with the system is going to change that reality. And if those libertarian principles ever do become popular, guess what? The Democrats and the Republicans will embrace those principles. They go where the voters are. Finally the presidential debates aren’t a platform for every political ideologue to have a chance to spread their message. That’s what we have the internet for. It’s a chance for the real candidates to appear before the public so the voters can look them over. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are real candidates. Rocky Anderson, Virgil Goode, Gary Johnson, and Jill Stein are not real candidates. You have a choice. You can participate in the real political system or you can participate in a make-believe political system. But don’t expect people in the real political system to take your make-believe political system seriously. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/44 "2015-02-22T05:22:11Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > The Democrats and the Republicans didn’t just happen to become the two big mainstream parties. They got there by finding out what the political views were of the overwhelming majority of voters and then embracing those political views. This is basically it. The two parties define the issues in an either/or way making alternatives seem inconsequential. Some countries have managed to avoid this but their parties just aren’t good at it yet. I suppose the nature of some countries would allow them to always maintain coalition type governments with more plural political philosophies, but this country doesn’t seem like it will ever do that. Perhaps we are too large to operate successfully in that mode. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 11:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/45 "2015-02-22T11:55:44Z")
I’d pick a winner take all parliamentary system instead of our current system which doesn’t work. Also politicians couldn’t redistrict themselves. And elections would be funded via public money and small donations. Plus there would be mandates and funding for smaller parties, a system with 5+ parties that have to form alliances would be better than our current system. Voting would be easy and incentivized. But there would be write in options as well as a ‘none of the above’ option. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/46 "2015-02-22T12:00:16Z")
> [@Desert\_Nomad](#): > > Two party system??? > > In 2012 the candidates were: > > Democrat - Barrack Obama / Joe Biden > Republican - Mitt Romney / Paul Ryan > Libertarian - Gary Johnson / Jim Gray > Green - Jill Stein / Cheri Honkala > Constitution - Virgil Goode / Jim Clymer > Justice - Rocky Anderson / Luis Rodriguez > > and several others… > > I voted Libertarian. Obama won 51.1% of the vote, Romney won 47.2. All the other parties won 1.7% of the vote combined one would assume. With the way our system is set up if you live in a swing state, voting for a 3rd party is basically just a way to make the opposition main party win. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/47 "2015-02-22T14:19:38Z")
“The church **building** shall not be subject to **property** tax.” The rest of the organization? Tax those guys. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/48 "2015-02-22T16:50:45Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > This is basically it. The two parties define the issues in an either/or way making alternatives seem inconsequential. And if you take two steps back, the parties are essentially indistinguishable from each other. Even the Rand Pauls and Berkeley congresscritters blend into the gray from not too distant a viewpoint. So since Americans are not likely to ever have truly radical (markedly divergent) political parties beyond the smallest fringe level, because the historical record is that no notable majority wants them, two near-clones are plenty to settle most elections. The fostered notion that vast divides between Pubbies and Crats are what drives politics, for good or bad, is, IMVHO, a fantasy. The real engine and real problems lie elsewhere, but Red! V! Blue! makes for great spectacle. Pass me some bread. ---
**Author:** ![sweat209](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@sweat209](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweat209)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/49 "2015-02-22T20:14:11Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > Obama won 51.1% of the vote, Romney won 47.2. All the other parties won 1.7% of the vote combined one would assume. > > With the way our system is set up if you live in a swing state, voting for a 3rd party is basically just a way to make the opposition main party win. The problem is not so much radical political parties greens,libertarians ,socialists so on. Where only a minority would vote for them. It is lack degrees of two party system. Those two parties are locked in script book saying this my believe and platform. If a liberal or conservative as any views different it not following party line book. This why countries in Europe have left,center left,center, right center and right wing parties. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/50 "2015-02-22T20:59:18Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > And if you take two steps back, the parties are essentially indistinguishable from each other. Even the Rand Pauls and Berkeley congresscritters blend into the gray from not too distant a viewpoint. > > So since Americans are not likely to ever have truly radical (markedly divergent) political parties beyond the smallest fringe level, because the historical record is that no notable majority wants them, two near-clones are plenty to settle most elections. > > The fostered notion that vast divides between Pubbies and Crats are what drives politics, for good or bad, is, IMVHO, a fantasy. The real engine and real problems lie elsewhere, but Red! V! Blue! makes for great spectacle. Pass me some bread. The thing is that Democrats and Republicans, as different yet similar as they are now, were MUCH CLOSER in the past. BOTH parties used to have conservative, moderate and liberal wings. Now, the Republicans really have no liberal wing at all. Unfortunately, neither do the Democrats, in any meaningful way. The Democrats have mostly gotten rid of their venomous Southern reactionary contingent, though. So we have the Republicans, who are right and far right, and the Democrats, who are center and center-right, with a completely ineffectual cloud of leftists kind of dragging along behind. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/51 "2015-02-22T21:05:55Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I think I’d change the Senate significantly: instead of being 2 senators per state, it’d be a parliamentary system, in which you vote for a party, and seats are distributed according to how many votes each party gets, each percentage of the overall vote according the party a single seat. The house would remain in its current form. That would not be a parliamentary system, it would be a [proportional representation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation) system. A [parliamentary system](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_system) would be one where Congress (however constituted) elects and can at any time dismiss the POTUS and Cabinet. ---
**Author:** ![sweat209](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@sweat209](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweat209)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/52 "2015-02-22T21:12:06Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > The thing is that Democrats and Republicans, as different yet similar as they are now, were MUCH CLOSER in the past. BOTH parties used to have conservative, moderate and liberal wings. Now, the Republicans really have no liberal wing at all. Unfortunately, neither do the Democrats, in any meaningful way. The Democrats have mostly gotten rid of their venomous Southern reactionary contingent, though. So we have the Republicans, who are right and far right, and the Democrats, who are center and center-right, with a completely ineffectual cloud of leftists kind of dragging along behind. That is so true. The Democrat party would be Canada conservative party and republican party would be far right conservative party in Canada. The US people are more center-right in way of thinking:eek::eek::eek: where people in Canada are more center-left in way of thinking. Countries in Europe are more mix center,left and far left in way of thinking. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/53 "2015-02-22T21:46:11Z")
I would empower Congress to dissolve states, make new states, redraw state boundaries, at any time and without consulting state governments. In most modern democracies, local government is reorganized by the national government every few decades for better efficiency, as a matter of course. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/54 "2015-02-22T22:02:56Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I would empower Congress to dissolve states, make new states, redraw state boundaries, at any time and without consulting state governments. In most modern democracies, local government is reorganized by the national government every few decades for better efficiency, as a matter of course. In with this. States’ rights are out. State sovereignty is out. States as simply an organizational construct would be much better. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/55 "2015-02-22T22:19:10Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > In with this. States’ rights are out. State sovereignty is out. States as simply an organizational construct would be much better. So much for the laboratories of democracy. So much for progressive movements advancing state by state. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/56 "2015-02-22T22:35:00Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > So much for the laboratories of democracy. So much for progressive movements advancing state by state. So much for recalcitrant rearguard footdragging on slavery, Jim Crow, marriage equality, etc. There’s as much negative about states’ rights as there is positive. ---
**Author:** ![sweat209](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@sweat209](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweat209)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/57 "2015-02-22T22:37:50Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > So much for the laboratories of democracy. So much for progressive movements advancing state by state. The US founding fathers wanted the states to be more like countries where most every thing is at state level. The feds have no control on abortion,homosexuality,same sex marriage,welfare or other matters. Only military, defense and immigration is federal manor. The founding fathers would be shocked at FDR being a federal manor and not a state manor to decide if they want it or not or what degrees of the FDR. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/58 "2015-02-22T22:44:10Z")
> [@sweat209](#): > > The US founding fathers wanted the states to be more like countries where most every thing is at state level. The feds have no control on abortion,homosexuality,same sex marriage,welfare or other matters. > > Only military, defense and immigration is federal manor. The founding fathers would be shocked at FDR being a federal manor and not a state manor to decide if they want it or not or what degrees of the FDR. The Founding Fathers are dead and were, moreover, not supermen or Time Lords. Their opinions are to be studied but are not binding. They created the Constitution with a way to modernize it for the ways that the country and society would change which they could never predict. It’s enlightening and interesting to examine their motivations and opinions about things, but it’s not in any way mandatory. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/59 "2015-02-22T22:48:37Z")
> [@Desert\_Nomad](#): > > Zero of course, but it was because people don’t vote for who they believe in, they vote for who they think can win and are convinced we have only two parties to choose from. We end up getting the “least terrible of two”. > > I vote for who I want in office. **If others voted like that,** the quasi-two party system would be broken immediately. How do you change the constitution to make THAT happen? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![sweat209](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@sweat209](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweat209)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2015, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268/60 "2015-02-22T22:52:05Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > The Founding Fathers are dead and were, moreover, not supermen or Time Lords. Their opinions are to be studied but are not binding. They created the Constitution with a way to modernize it for the ways that the country and society would change which they could never predict. It’s enlightening and interesting to examine their motivations and opinions about things, but it’s not in any way mandatory. So if most people in Florida oppose food stamps and social security is it far for the feds to say sorry it is federal thing and you got to pay for it. Is it far for state of California if most people oppose abortion,same sex marriage for federal government to say sorry it is a federal thing. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-you-change-about-the-us-government-if-you-could-start-from-scratch/713268.md?page=4)