Jump to content
270soft Forum

Proposal for Perhaps a Better Election Cycle


vcczar
 Share

Recommended Posts

Obviously this would never happen, but what if all elections just occurred during presidential election years?

  • Presidential election would occur as usual every 4 years.
  • All state governor races would be recalibrated to occur during this same election, as would state and local elections.
    • I obviously can see the States Rights argument for not doing this, but I think it might be a good idea if all other elections are aligned
  • All Senator terms are reduced to 4 years, and both senators for every state are elected/reelected during presidential election years.
  • All US Rep terms are increased to 4 years and are elected/reelected during presidential election years. 

The upside/downside to doing this, depending on your preference, is that:

  • Turnout will probably be a lot higher since even more importance is placed on the election every 4 years.
  • You don't have to worry about so many people not voting in midterm elections.
  • Every 4 years might see massive changes at every level of the federal and state governments unless the president is solid for 4 straight years.
  • A bad or disliked president that came in with a majority will be able to maintain a lot of power for 4 years instead of 2 years, when the country can vote to limit their power. 
  • I'm unsure if this would greatly help 3rd parties or not. I can see it either having no impact or having an impact. 

I'm not really advocating this. I just think it is interesting to think about how it would change elections and possibly the government. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, vcczar said:

Obviously this would never happen, but what if all elections just occurred during presidential election years?

  • Presidential election would occur as usual every 4 years.
  • All state governor races would be recalibrated to occur during this same election, as would state and local elections.
    • I obviously can see the States Rights argument for not doing this, but I think it might be a good idea if all other elections are aligned
  • All Senator terms are reduced to 4 years, and both senators for every state are elected/reelected during presidential election years.
  • All US Rep terms are increased to 4 years and are elected/reelected during presidential election years. 

The upside/downside to doing this, depending on your preference, is that:

  • Turnout will probably be a lot higher since even more importance is placed on the election every 4 years.
  • You don't have to worry about so many people not voting in midterm elections.
  • Every 4 years might see massive changes at every level of the federal and state governments unless the president is solid for 4 straight years.
  • A bad or disliked president that came in with a majority will be able to maintain a lot of power for 4 years instead of 2 years, when the country can vote to limit their power. 
  • I'm unsure if this would greatly help 3rd parties or not. I can see it either having no impact or having an impact. 

I'm not really advocating this. I just think it is interesting to think about how it would change elections and possibly the government. 

I hate to say it, but I don't think this would address most of the core problems and flaws at all. It's just harmonizes the term numbers, and might increase turnout.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, vcczar said:

Obviously this would never happen, but what if all elections just occurred during presidential election years?

  • Presidential election would occur as usual every 4 years.
  • All state governor races would be recalibrated to occur during this same election, as would state and local elections.
    • I obviously can see the States Rights argument for not doing this, but I think it might be a good idea if all other elections are aligned
  • All Senator terms are reduced to 4 years, and both senators for every state are elected/reelected during presidential election years.
  • All US Rep terms are increased to 4 years and are elected/reelected during presidential election years. 

The upside/downside to doing this, depending on your preference, is that:

  • Turnout will probably be a lot higher since even more importance is placed on the election every 4 years.
  • You don't have to worry about so many people not voting in midterm elections.
  • Every 4 years might see massive changes at every level of the federal and state governments unless the president is solid for 4 straight years.
  • A bad or disliked president that came in with a majority will be able to maintain a lot of power for 4 years instead of 2 years, when the country can vote to limit their power. 
  • I'm unsure if this would greatly help 3rd parties or not. I can see it either having no impact or having an impact. 

I'm not really advocating this. I just think it is interesting to think about how it would change elections and possibly the government. 

I'd disagree.  I think the current system of 2 years for Reps, 4 years for President, 6 years for Senate (rotating), and lifetime for the Supreme Court is actually ingenious.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

What about the electoral college?

I would abolish that but I’m only discussing election days and terms in this. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

I'd disagree.  I think the current system of 2 years for Reps, 4 years for President, 6 years for Senate (rotating), and lifetime for the Supreme Court is actually ingenious.  

The Supreme Court one would be if they weren't nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and thus usually chosen for blatant ideological bias and partisan spoils and patronage, as opposed to the more admirable qualities of high jurisprudence, completely defeating the whole point of an independent judiciary and sober judicial review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Patine said:

The Supreme Court one would be if they weren't nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and thus usually chosen for blatant ideological bias and partisan spoils and patronage, as opposed to the more admirable qualities of high jurisprudence, completely defeating the whole point of an independent judiciary and sober judicial review.

Sure, but who would nominate and confirm them instead?  Some independent committee, no doubt -- but who nominates and confirms that committee?  Okay, but who nominates and confirms the people who nominate and confirm the committee? Etc, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

Sure, but who would nominate and confirm them instead?  Some independent committee, no doubt -- but who nominates and confirms that committee?  Okay, but who nominates and confirms the people who nominate and confirm the committee? Etc, etc.

The State Bar Associations, major University Faculties of Law, and Federal Justice emerita who had actually retired rather than died on the bench could be represented on such a commission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...