Several Characteristics of My Ideal Government (1st draft)

1) A representative democracy is the one major detail I will refuse to back off from. A representive democracy would be less messy than a direct democracy, and less prone to national unhappiness than a dictator ship.

A) Giving all adult citizens the ability to vote for politicians and constitutional amendments (state, federal) will provide flexibility in the system. Yes, the leaders in Washington make the decisions, but once constituents are dissapointed in a leader, they can kick him out for some one who they like. Leaders must know they that are in this position of power not because they are necessarily smarter than every one else, but because it is easier for only several hundred congressman to write a bill rather than several thousand, hundreds of thousands, or millions.
Now, depostism shares the same fundamental problem with anarchism: human nature. All systems of government share this problem, but depostism and anarchism are especially sensitive. Consider the Roman Empire, where Pertinax got murdered by soldiers. He was replaced by Didius Julianus, who was sentenced to death by the Senate after only a couple of months of being Emperor. He was replaced by Septimius Severus, who died from illness, thank God for that. But then Caracalla, assassinated. Geta, assassinated by Caracalla (!). Macrinus, executed. Diadumnian, executed. Elagabalus, assassinated. Alexander Severus, assassinated. Look, I don't need to list every body else. Let's just say that the only job more dangerous than Roman Emperor is a taxi driver who works on a mine field.
There was no system in place to make things kosher. It was run like the heavyweight championship. No simple line of succession. Or peaceful system to remove rulers who want to stay. If people don't like a lawmaker or executive, they can kick him out come election day.

2. A voting system garners respect for the government because voting will know that they stake in the system. They respect the system because they own it. That means keeping unruly mobs to a minimum. Know why there were so many riots in the 60s? Because the rioters felt that they had no other recourse. They felt powerless in the greater scheme of things. Giving people the vote--as many as physically possible--is the best means to garner respect for the system. Yes, that means giving felons the vote, too (except when they are in prison, since politics is a great way to light short tempers). The minute convicts leave prison is the minute their registration process should begin in their state.

In short: Any economic system can thrive. Any general philosohpy for law enforcement can work for the betterment of society. All you need is good management, and democracy is the best way to move with the many variables involved with governing. For example, consider when Americans during the Great Depression replaced the laissez-faire President Hoover with FDR.

2) Transparancy

The number one reason why no one trusts government. First...you need mandatory waiting periods before bill are enacted or even voted on, where the exact text of the bill is available to the public online, and in appropriate physical publications. That means 3 - 5 days for any legislative body, and 3-5 days before the executive office will sign the bill into law. When the waiting period is over, the lawmakers will vote on the bill. Appropriate parlimentary procedure will ensure that no one can amend the bill from the moment the lawmaking body decides to send the bill into its waiting period to the moment that they as a body vote for it. If it passes and goes to another law making body (eg. from the House to the Senate), and that new body decides to vote on the bill, they must wait another 3-5 days where the bill is published for the general public. Then if they pass the bill, then it is sent to the executive, who waits antoehr 3-5 day. No earlier than the exact moment of the bill's online publication should the waiting period be considered to have begun, in any governmental body.

All government funding is revealed to the general public.

All court cases are open to the general public.

Government pays for advertising to run on prime time television listing the candidates for local, state, and national office from the beginning of the 30 days before the election to the night before the election. (Television networks can reject the government's request to buy ad time, but the government must have found a byer by the relevant date.)


3) Federation

A national government handles issues that are strictly interstate, where state governments handle issues that are relevant to them. This is just a better management principle than having too many relevant decisions made for you by people who have no stake in your community. That would be like a sandwich franchise telling a New Jersey location of the franchise to overstock on mustard, but, apparantly, mustard is unpopular in New Jersey.

A quick thought at an ungodly hour

Why not spend more attention in the media on unemployment rates? This would, while also looking at the Federal debt and DOW Jones, would give a more detailed understanding of the economy for the lay man.

The Legacies of Presidents

Respected presidents served during turbulent times in history. The men we tend to place on the top of the president's list, like FDR, Lincoln, and Washington, all served during a time when the future of the country itself was really uncertain, and no one would have been nutty to predict a bleak future. The Great Depression, the Civil War, the founding of the freaking country itself. Yet, they, their aides, congress, and the citizens all teamed up and reasserted the strength of the nation, and they are considered great, even though few people would love to visit 1931, 1862, or 1790. The great presidents served at times when life in the nation was rough.

Yes, Bill Clinton seems to have been a pretty good president. Sure, he left office with a surplus in the budget. But he didn't save the country from dissolution. All the military actions committed during his presidency had to due with locations and interests with no direct effect on most citizens. Yeah, he helped improve the economy, but he didn't have to deal with a complete, utter and unprecidented failure in the system, where even the federal government doesn't seem to have the money to fund it's own programs, the credit markets seem to be drying up, and the ultimate damage on most people has yet to occur. That's why Bill only gets a gold star and a handshake, even if he had the ability to confront a calamity.

Dow dropping below 8,500. Nobody can buy their own home. Gas sucks. Debt sucks. A 10 trillion dollar national debt. Hell, I am more worried about the health of the national government than I am about what's happening on 'Main Street.' People are robust, and can watch their own backs; governments are transitory entities held together by enough consent from the governed, and enough power from the governors. And the governors are running out of cash. Ron Paul would probably pop a vein to see my analysis of this, but a successful president would get a lot of credit should he implent and support a variety of policies that turn around this financial failure.

Whoever wins the presidency will go down in history as one of the greats (FDR, Lincoln, Washington) or as one of the greatest asshats (Buchanan, Hoover, George Walker Bush). It doesn't matter how hard he tries, how many hours he puts into the job, how hard he sweats; the results are what matters. If he is unable to have a prominent hand in turning things around, historians will be likely to plant a big 'dunce' cap on him.