Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 21, 2014, 12:53:34 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Discussion
| |-+  Constitution and Law (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | |-+  The 101st Senator.
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: The 101st Senator.  (Read 1987 times)
retromike22
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1556
United States


View Profile
« on: November 17, 2011, 04:17:11 pm »
Ignore

I've always thought it odd that the position of the Vice President exists. It's not a well defined position other than "back-up President." Probably the most important power they have to break a tie in the U.S. Senate. But I have an idea. What if the Vice President always had a vote in the Senate? So there would be 101 members of the Senate. 2 from each state, and the Vice President.

Logged

I wrote and directed my own movie. It's about an intern, a doctor, a mayor, a cross dressing prostitute, farmers, aliens, and zombies:
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=181696.0
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28729
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 17, 2011, 09:28:39 pm »

I've always thought it odd that the position of the Vice President exists. It's not a well defined position other than "back-up President." Probably the most important power they have to break a tie in the U.S. Senate. But I have an idea. What if the Vice President always had a vote in the Senate? So there would be 101 members of the Senate. 2 from each state, and the Vice President.

The only real difference is that the Vice-President would get to participate in the election of his successor when the election of the Vice-President goes to the House.

Personally, I think we should have at the moment 104 Senators, with the 101st to 104th Senators being Senators Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Bush Jr. by virtue of being ex-Presidents. (Presidents who resign or are impeached would not get that privilege.)
Logged

People find meaning and redemption in the most unusual human connections. Khaled Hosseini
Joe Republic
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30873
United States


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 17, 2011, 10:04:48 pm »
Ignore

Personally, I think we should have at the moment 104 Senators, with the 101st to 104th Senators being Senators Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Bush Jr. by virtue of being ex-Presidents. (Presidents who resign or are impeached would not get that privilege.)

Assuming they would be granted that position for the rest of their lives, I'm not comfortable with the idea of legislative officeholders not having to face the electorate on a regular basis.  The idea of GWB being rewarded for his piss-poor presidency with a lifetime role in a different branch of government is not a savory one.  Senator Carter would have been a member of the Senate for the past thirty years, and not had to face an election once.
Logged



Real Americans (and Big Sky Bob) demand to know.


I just slept for 11 hours, so I should need a nap today, but we'll see.
Teddy (IDS Legislator)
nickjbor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8314
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -1.91

View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 17, 2011, 11:40:04 pm »
Ignore

I've always thought the idea of the losing candidate in presidential (and vice) elections should become Senator; opposition leader of a sort, while the VP would get a regular seat to balance things.
Logged

TEDDY - ARKANSAS - IDS - Liberal Whip



Note to self: use brain more.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28729
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 18, 2011, 01:55:05 am »

Personally, I think we should have at the moment 104 Senators, with the 101st to 104th Senators being Senators Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Bush Jr. by virtue of being ex-Presidents. (Presidents who resign or are impeached would not get that privilege.)

Assuming they would be granted that position for the rest of their lives, I'm not comfortable with the idea of legislative officeholders not having to face the electorate on a regular basis.  The idea of GWB being rewarded for his piss-poor presidency with a lifetime role in a different branch of government is not a savory one.  Senator Carter would have been a member of the Senate for the past thirty years, and not had to face an election once.

Considering that they would be but a few out of many, it doesn't really bother me that this would be a lifetime office.  It does provide one answer to the question of what do you do with an ex-President.

I've always thought the idea of the losing candidate in presidential (and vice) elections should become Senator; opposition leader of a sort, while the VP would get a regular seat to balance things.

Nah.  If you don't win, you don't win.  The Constitution is silent on the issue of political parties, and what do you do when there are multiple losing opponents?  Would you really have wanted Governor Thurmond to go into the Senate after losing in 1948?
Logged

People find meaning and redemption in the most unusual human connections. Khaled Hosseini
IDS Legislator Pingvin
Pingvin99
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2414
Estonia


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 05, 2011, 04:40:40 am »
Ignore

Actually I like idea of giving position of "All-American Senator" to former presidents and vice-presidents!
Logged

Хahar
Xahar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38875
Bangladesh


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: December 06, 2011, 12:12:43 am »
Ignore

Personally, I think we should have at the moment 104 Senators, with the 101st to 104th Senators being Senators Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Bush Jr. by virtue of being ex-Presidents. (Presidents who resign or are impeached would not get that privilege.)

I can't think of anything good coming from this idea; it's at best undemocratic. Italy's had problems with it.
Logged

Update reading list

The idea of parodying the preceding Atlasian's postings is laughable, of course, but not for reasons one might expect.
Pope Callixtus IV
Kalwejt
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 37635


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: December 06, 2011, 07:36:44 am »
Ignore

No thanks. I'm not a fan of offices-for-life.
Logged
Pope Callixtus IV
Kalwejt
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 37635


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: December 10, 2011, 07:48:24 pm »
Ignore

Nah.  If you don't win, you don't win.  The Constitution is silent on the issue of political parties, and what do you do when there are multiple losing opponents?  Would you really have wanted Governor Thurmond to go into the Senate after losing in 1948?

And what about those who didn't quite run but received electoral votes from faithless elector (so, technically, were "candidates")? A freaking Senator-for-life Walter B. Jones in 1956?
Logged
Jerseyrules
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2484
United States


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: February 02, 2012, 01:23:33 am »
Ignore

IMP the VP should be the head of the legislative branch, elected by the people staggered from the POTUS, I.e. in off-year elections.  They should also have equal if not more power than POTUS
Logged

Drink Too Much:
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=147022.0

An Empire of Stars and Stripes:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=156974.0

Quote
FOOL!  I AM Cathcon!

Endorsements:
President: Hillary Clinton
Governor: Brown (CA), Corbett (PA), Scott (FL)
House: Emken (CA)
Other: Rob McCoy (CA Assembly)

---------------------------------------

Libertarian Internationalist Monarchist
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32090
United States


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: March 15, 2012, 11:57:42 pm »
Ignore

Nah.  If you don't win, you don't win.  The Constitution is silent on the issue of political parties, and what do you do when there are multiple losing opponents?  Would you really have wanted Governor Thurmond to go into the Senate after losing in 1948?

And what about those who didn't quite run but received electoral votes from faithless elector (so, technically, were "candidates")? A freaking Senator-for-life Walter B. Jones in 1956?

In theory, it could be the candidate with the second highest number of electoral votes.
Logged

J. J.

"Actually, .. now that you mention it...." 
- Londo Molari

"Every government are parliaments of whores.
The trouble is, in a democracy the whores are us." - P. J. O'Rourke

"Wa sala, wa lala."

(Zulu for, "You snooze, you lose.")
Pope Callixtus IV
Kalwejt
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 37635


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: March 16, 2012, 08:33:12 am »
Ignore

Nah.  If you don't win, you don't win.  The Constitution is silent on the issue of political parties, and what do you do when there are multiple losing opponents?  Would you really have wanted Governor Thurmond to go into the Senate after losing in 1948?

And what about those who didn't quite run but received electoral votes from faithless elector (so, technically, were "candidates")? A freaking Senator-for-life Walter B. Jones in 1956?

In theory, it could be the candidate with the second highest number of electoral votes.

In such case, is a runner-up is an incumbent Senator, I assume he'd simply move from an elected to a lifetime seat.
Logged
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58775
India


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: March 16, 2012, 03:44:52 pm »
Ignore

Nah.  If you don't win, you don't win.  The Constitution is silent on the issue of political parties, and what do you do when there are multiple losing opponents?  Would you really have wanted Governor Thurmond to go into the Senate after losing in 1948?

And what about those who didn't quite run but received electoral votes from faithless elector (so, technically, were "candidates")? A freaking Senator-for-life Walter B. Jones in 1956?
Clearly everybody who ran for President, even by paying a 30 dollar filing fee in the New Hampshire primary, should be made a Senator for life. That goes without saying. Grin
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58775
India


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: March 16, 2012, 03:47:36 pm »
Ignore

Nah.  If you don't win, you don't win.  The Constitution is silent on the issue of political parties, and what do you do when there are multiple losing opponents?  Would you really have wanted Governor Thurmond to go into the Senate after losing in 1948?

And what about those who didn't quite run but received electoral votes from faithless elector (so, technically, were "candidates")? A freaking Senator-for-life Walter B. Jones in 1956?

In theory, it could be the candidate with the second highest number of electoral votes.
The Vice Presidency was of course invented for exactly that purpose originally, as part of a compromise package between those who wanted the electoral college to choose the President and those who basically wanted it to draw up a shortlist for Congress to choose from.

REPEAL THE XIIth AMENDMENT! Cheesy
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Pope Callixtus IV
Kalwejt
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 37635


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: March 17, 2012, 08:41:15 am »
Ignore

Nah.  If you don't win, you don't win.  The Constitution is silent on the issue of political parties, and what do you do when there are multiple losing opponents?  Would you really have wanted Governor Thurmond to go into the Senate after losing in 1948?

And what about those who didn't quite run but received electoral votes from faithless elector (so, technically, were "candidates")? A freaking Senator-for-life Walter B. Jones in 1956?
Clearly everybody who ran for President, even by paying a 30 dollar filing fee in the New Hampshire primary, should be made a Senator for life. That goes without saying. Grin

Well, in such case elected members would make up like 1% of the Senate Grin
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32090
United States


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: March 17, 2012, 10:01:07 am »
Ignore

Nah.  If you don't win, you don't win.  The Constitution is silent on the issue of political parties, and what do you do when there are multiple losing opponents?  Would you really have wanted Governor Thurmond to go into the Senate after losing in 1948?

And what about those who didn't quite run but received electoral votes from faithless elector (so, technically, were "candidates")? A freaking Senator-for-life Walter B. Jones in 1956?

In theory, it could be the candidate with the second highest number of electoral votes.

In such case, is a runner-up is an incumbent Senator, I assume he'd simply move from an elected to a lifetime seat.

There would be a vacancy in the senate seat, in that instance (as there were in 2009).

I really think that people come in second for a reason, and don't like the idea too much.
Logged

J. J.

"Actually, .. now that you mention it...." 
- Londo Molari

"Every government are parliaments of whores.
The trouble is, in a democracy the whores are us." - P. J. O'Rourke

"Wa sala, wa lala."

(Zulu for, "You snooze, you lose.")
Pope Callixtus IV
Kalwejt
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 37635


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: March 17, 2012, 10:56:24 am »
Ignore

Nah.  If you don't win, you don't win.  The Constitution is silent on the issue of political parties, and what do you do when there are multiple losing opponents?  Would you really have wanted Governor Thurmond to go into the Senate after losing in 1948?

And what about those who didn't quite run but received electoral votes from faithless elector (so, technically, were "candidates")? A freaking Senator-for-life Walter B. Jones in 1956?

In theory, it could be the candidate with the second highest number of electoral votes.

In such case, is a runner-up is an incumbent Senator, I assume he'd simply move from an elected to a lifetime seat.

There would be a vacancy in the senate seat, in that instance (as there were in 2009).

I really think that people come in second for a reason, and don't like the idea too much.

So, why not to create a third, upper-upper House to stuff all these people? American House of Lords, preferably with marginal powers.

John McCain, Baron McCain of Hanoi.
Richard B. Cheney, Baron Cheney of Haliburton.
J. Danforth Quayle, Baron Quayle of Phoenix.
Albert A. Gore, Baron Gore of Internets.
J. Richard Perry, Baron Perry of Niggerhead.
George H. W. Bush, Baron Bush of Kennebunkport.
Richard J. Santorum, Baron Santorum of Great Falls.
James E. Carter, Baron Carter of Malaise.
Newton L. Gingrich, Baron Gingrich of Luna.

Of course, there would be multiple Barons Romney to sit in the Lords. Baron Romney of Detroit, Baron Romney of Boston, Baron Romney of Nashua, BARONBOT-ROMNEY, etc.
Logged
I'm JewCon in name only.
Klecly
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 922
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.61, S: 6.52

View Profile
« Reply #17 on: March 17, 2012, 08:17:12 pm »
Ignore

No thanks. I'm not a fan of offices-for-life.
Logged

Del Tachi
Republican95
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2453


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: 5.91

P P
View Profile
« Reply #18 on: March 29, 2012, 04:15:31 pm »
Ignore

The Senate is the most important check that State governments retain on the federal government.  Thus, I do not like the idea of "stateless" Senators. 
Logged

Pope Callixtus IV
Kalwejt
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 37635


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: March 29, 2012, 05:51:19 pm »
Ignore

The Senate is the most important check that State governments retain on the federal government.  Thus, I do not like the idea of "stateless" Senators. 

Senators are not dependent on their home state governments.

Ever heard about a little thing called Seventeenth Amendment?
Logged
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28729
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: March 29, 2012, 07:19:38 pm »

The Senate is the most important check that State governments retain on the federal government.  Thus, I do not like the idea of "stateless" Senators. 

Senators are not dependent on their home state governments.

Ever heard about a little thing called Seventeenth Amendment?

Some of us still hope for its repeal.  Rather than popular election, I'd have much rather seen the powers of the Senate limited.
Logged

People find meaning and redemption in the most unusual human connections. Khaled Hosseini
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines