Page 1 of 1

A new legislative system

PostPosted:Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:17 am
by ekcol
I propose a governmental system free of any supreme executive office. Simply imagine there would be no president or PM. I think that this is best, first because the actual duties associated with the executive branch, as I think the British system can show, can be carried out by committee instead of an individual. The operation of the military and police forces are handled largely bureaucratically anyway, and the top position I feel can be supported by a rotating member council. I also do not see why, as in America, a single man's opinion can strike down (veto) the clear opinion of the majority, as if a president has some mystical understanding beyond the grasp of a popularly elected Congress. That being said, the structure of this system is as such:

It is bicameral, with one house being the larger, elected by proportional representation, and the other being smaller and popularly elected as a nation. Both houses are continuous bodies. The former shall be here called the Lower House, the latter being the Upper House. The difference between an American Congress and these bodies is that the structure of the American Congress is linear, that is, the houses operate on the same level, while in this system the houses serve very different functions. The Lower House has the responsibilities of proposing the need for legislation in a certain area. There is no authority in this house to actually submit legislation.

For example, they may submit to the Upper House: "Abortion is to be curbed." This leaves the possibility for the Upper house, who's function I shall describe here shortly, to draft legislation ranging from outright ban on abortion to a small limit on circumstances in which abortion is allowed. However, they may not fully legalize it with this suggestion from the Lower House. If it isn't clear by now, the function of the Upper House is to actually write laws, although it can not pass a bill into law, without first sending it back to the Lower house for approval. The Upper House also manages federal judges (I guess I can mention now that there would still be a constitutional court to review laws) and has a quickly rotating committee to handle the military.

In short, the Lower House can suggest legislation and approve it, but can not actually write a law by themselves. The Upper House can write laws but not actually initiate or pass them alone. Alone, either branch is impotent. No executive means that the real needs of the nation will drive the government, not the ideological pursuits and politicking of a party man.