State governments should switch to a parliamentary system because it's superior

The constitution of the United States only required a republican form of government. (Meaning there can be no hereditary executive. Representative Democracy =/= Republic) With that said it doesn't mean states can't model their governments after countries like Germany that have a vastly superior system of government then our awful presidential democracies.

This system would reduce partisanship, increase representation, and fix the rural-urban divide. It's slightly different than the German system.

Electoral system
Proportional representation: Really simple anyone or any group can form a political party, they simply need to have enough eligible members to fill every seat in the lower house.

Then on election day voters vote for a party not a candidate in state wide elections. Parties get admitted based on the percentage of the vote.

Every person at age 18 who is a citizen of the state gets automatically registered to vote.

Parliament lower house
The lower house of the state parliament elects the head of government or the Prime Minister. They need a majority of members to back them so if no party gets a majority then a coalition will need to form. They serve while they have the confidence of the lower house.

Terms last 4 years unless situations arise requiring an election to happen sooner get to that later.

Parliament upper house
The upper house will be completely different then the senates we have today. They will not have the power to introduce legislation they will only have the power to veto legislation. Lets explain.

The upper house will be made up of persons appointed by the state counties/independent cities, as long as they have at least 10K people as local governments for local issues are set up. If there isn't 10K people they get joined with a neighboring county. Each local government gets 3 people to appoint 1 every 2 years in rotation.

State President
The Head of State will be the state president which will have reserve powers to call new elections in the case of a Prime Minister being unable to be chosen or in the case of a constitutional crisis. They also control the civil service and oversee all government employees.

They sign in the Prime Minister.

The President is elected by the upper house the upper house will vote amongst themselves in 2 rounds. The first being the General election and the second being a run off. The winner of the majority is president for 4 years. To make it less political.

How bills are passed.

A bill is introduced into the lower house debated, then brought to a vote by the Prime Minister, Passes the lower house.

The Upper House has 1 month to debate and vote on the bill. If they vote against the bill then it goes back to the lower house. If they pass the bill it goes to the President to sign. The President can't veto.

If the Bill returns to the lower house, they will have a second vote and the Yes votes must be a higher percentage in the lower house than the No votes in the upper house. If they are successful it passes and the president signs it and it becomes law.

 

State governments should switch to a parliamentary system because it's superior
The founders and framers viewed the separation of independent powers as essential to the constitution as a republic form of government itself. Parliamentary systems do not have that. Our framers and founders were (are) correct.

 

I have often said that the whole NATION should adopt a parliamentary system. A Parliamentary Republic similar to Germany or Israel would work very well. However, it's not going to happen.

 

Fake news. Germany is not a 'vastly superior' government system. Their energy policy has been so stupid that they are facing a crisis and they have relied on the US for their military protection decades after it was time for them to carry their own weight.

https://news.yahoo.com › germany-primes-energy-price-cap-143100619.html
Germany primes energy price cap as bills soar
'Germany on Wednesday put the finishing touches on an energy price cap, the cornerstone of a massive 200-billion-euro ($198-billion) package to shield households and businesses from rising costs. "Immediate help is on its way!" Chancellor Olaf Scholz said on Twitter, who has ploughed ahead with plans despite criticisms from European partners.'

 

a two party system, even without "unitary executive" and "independent state legislature," dilutes the separation of powers to the point that would appall "the framers"
.

 

There isn't a shred of evidence that a parliamentary system is a whit better and is often times worse.

 

A simple word, no.

 

A great question. I have always wondered about Parliamentary versus what we have. Its a real trade off. Ours system is more stable. But stability can also mean being "stuck" as we now are with Biden for 2 more years. In a Parliamentary system, a divide nation can result in an endless series of "no confidence" actions which inherently destabilize the the government. Its a difficult question.

 

You do know that in the past the system that Israel has that "works very well" has had massive outbreaks of deadly violence during their election cycles.

 

Boy you guys are sure trying to milk that extremely rare occurrence (of women getting pregnant via rape).

 

Stable governments are very rare. Israel's has been stable since its founding in the 1940's. Without really researching it, I believe that the UK is the government that has remained stable the longest, followed by the USA. Germany's Government has only been around since the 1950's. China's is slightly younger. Russia's current government isn't as old as my son.

 

Would this be an appropriate time to comment on the briefness of many of Italy's governments.

 

then why is the right trying to do it?

so what is the answer to the question?

 

We're not. Except from the standpoint of eliminating elective abortion altogether.

 

that means the right IS doing it, as that does just that

be like saying, the right is not forcing you to be Vegan, they are just banning all meat

 

As good as any.

 

Would it protect us from leftist who want to murder babies in the womb and maim those that manage to be born?

 

The idea behind a Parliamentary system is not to avoid deadly violence, like what we saw on January 6. It's because if would allow the Parliament to remove the Head of State if they ever accidently pick an idiot like Trump. But, worry not... MAGAS will STILL have a chance to attempt their failed coups in a Parliamentary system.

 

so basically a parliamentary system has nothing to offer other than it makes it far easier for 50.1% if the population to shove bad ideas down the throat of the the other 49.9%

 

And, of course, you believe it would be preferable to have a dictator who shoves bad ideas down the throat of 100% of the population.

 

No I would prefer that it be damned hard for any one to force anything on anyone. I'd prefer it takes at least a 60% majority in Congress to pass any law or regulation at any time.

 

you can falsely accuse people of murder all day, does not make it so

now Republicans for the poor... after they really are born

"Bush Criticized for End-of-Life Laws"

https://web.archive.org/web/20051219170102/http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,151448,00.html

"But on March 15, a Texas law signed by then-Gov. George W. Bush (search) in 1999 allowed the hospital to go ahead and take Sun off the respirator in defiance of Wanda Hudson's wishes."

 

a series of "no confidence votes eventually results in policy more reflective of the "consent of the governed."

@garyd

a parliamentary systems is more friendly to multiple parties and can be more responsive to crises.

 

And to tyranny, Demogogues and many other ills. Italy us all but ungovernable because it has so many parties that there are times when a government cannot be formed for an extended period of time Israel has had similar issues at times.

 

Meanwhile unlesscreating more poor people helps them tell me one thing the left has ever done that actually helped the poor.