THIS guy for president!!!

[Flash]

Either way it is a parliamentary system in which the executive is accountable to the body.

I like the idea of having something similar, and even though our executive is constitutionally on equal terms with the legislature there is nothing unconstitutional about requiring a formal interview session. Our Constitution already requires that the President address the Congress and the nation from time to time in the state of the union.

Its my understanding that under the Westminster system the body can force the executive to do something, while under our system Congress legally forcing the POTUS is rather rare. Adding an interview session with the Congress wouldn't change the formal balance of power, if anything it would act as a check against the runaway presidential power of the Modern Presidency.

Executive might not be the right word, the Prime Minister in the Westminster system is the head of government, not the head of state. The 'executive' would officially be the head of state, in the UK it is Queen. The Parliament cannot just force the Prime Minister to do something per se but they can actually vote them out without a general election, it happened to Thatcher in 1990.

And while some aspects are appealing one just has to look at Israel and Canada right now to see how minority/coalition governments can hobble a governments actions. While our system has some weaknesses it has a lot more strengths.

 

[Junkball]

Counterpoint

I love the command of language that guy has. He could teach our politicians a thing or two about making a point and sounding good while you do it.

This clip features both points: fantastic command of the English language (so good in fact, that I've never heard several of the words), and making a point worthy of our representatives' time! (UF grads, hang your heads... 41-35!)

 

[picklesuit]

This clip features both points: fantastic command of the English language (so good in fact, that I've never heard several of the words), and making a point worthy of our representatives' time! (UF grads, hang your heads... 41-35!)

At least the congresswoman is an accurate representation of the fine herd of humanity indigenous to Florida's 3rd District...not just another rich white dude....

 

[Kazimake]

Either way it is a parliamentary system in which the executive is accountable to the body.

Aye, just pointing out why there was all the European Union stuff in it.

 

[PerDiem]

blah...blah..blah... (UF grads, hang your heads... 41-35!)

*cough* Appalachian State *cough*

 

[Spekkio]

Either way it is a parliamentary system in which the executive is accountable to the body.

I like the idea of having something similar, and even though our executive is constitutionally on equal terms with the legislature there is nothing unconstitutional about requiring a formal interview session. Our Constitution already requires that the President address the Congress and the nation from time to time in the state of the union.

Its my understanding that under the Westminster system the body can force the executive to do something, while under our system Congress legally forcing the POTUS is rather rare. Adding an interview session with the Congress wouldn't change the formal balance of power, if anything it would act as a check against the runaway presidential power of the Modern Presidency.

I strongly disagree.

Granted, Congress has ceded too much power to the President since WWII. However, I do not think a parliamentary system is the answer. Call me idealistic, but I still believe in our system.

 

[AJB37]

This clip features both points: fantastic command of the English language (so good in fact, that I've never heard several of the words), and making a point worthy of our representatives' time! (UF grads, hang your heads... 41-35!)

That clip made my head hurt.

 

[statesman]

Im not advocating a parliamentary system... I am a Federalist THROUGH AND THROUGH but I think having the President give non-binding answers to the Congress in a formal setting would be good. Make it a two way conversation if you like, allow the President his own session to ask questions of members of congress.

All non binding of course as the legislative and executive are not beholden to one another. The system we have now has the public discourse between the executive and the legislative taking place in press conferences. Certainly they communicate in other ways, but the public only sees things from the view of the press.

 

[Spekkio]

Well, here's the thing: in England, the PM is beholden to the Parliament; he is "elected" by the majority party and is supposed to represent their interests.

In America, the President is elected by the people, and is supposed to represent the people's interest.

As such, it makes sense to have such sessions with the PM of England to "keep him in check." In America, it'd mostly be a waste of time. The President does not "owe" Congress anything, and such a debate would not shift the balance of power one way or another.

 

[statesman]

Then what is the purpose of the State of the Union? What purpose was it originally intended to serve? The President has the authority to say one thing in the SotU and do something completely different, but it certainly serves a purpose, and holds him accountable to the American people.

 

[swerdna]

Then what is the purpose of the State of the Union? What purpose was it originally intended to serve? The President has the authority to say one thing in the SotU and do something completely different, but it certainly serves a purpose, and holds him accountable to the American people.

I hate citing Wikipedia, but it's all I found on the matter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_the_Union_Address

Basically, the SotU is required by the Constitution. Most of our presidents didn't even bother giving a proper SotU. The only thing that really holds the POTUS accountable is an election.

And what was up with that robe she was wearing? It's not even an election year.

 

[euclid83]

*cough* Appalachian State *cough*

Oh snap!!! hahahaha

 

[VIZKRIEG]

I feel bad for the stenographer for having to keep up with all that nonsense she said.

 

[Random8145]

Smart Brit he is.