Well there are two things I would add into this process. First, for the legislative body voting on the appointment, I would require a 2/3 majority to foster more debate and be certain that everyone is on board. 51% just doesn't cut it when it's such an important appointment. Second, I would create a citizen's committee to review, recommend, and submit the final list of potential candidates to the legislative body. Third (and I know this is onerous for many people--particularly for the less educated), I would implement a requirement that the citizen's committe consist only of individuals who fit two of the following three criteria: a) they must have a college degree, b) they must be respected members of the community who have proven themselves to be civically minded and actively engaged in community affairs, and/or c) they must take a test to determine their awareness of the current issues and the potential candidates positions on those issues and recieve a score of 75% or better. Finally, I would have the selection process be open door with character witnesses coming forward about each candiate who would speak for or against that candidate. All such witnesses must substantiate all statements made for or against a candidate. No smear campaigns allowed. The legislative body should be allowed to ask questions of the character witnesses just as they are able to when considering any judicial appointment.
I understand your desire to foster some level of biparistanship. I wouldn't want the requirements to low, but not too high, either. I'm not quite sure 2/3 would be appropriate. One must remember, even among democrats, there are different levels of agreement. There has be some level of clearance that an agenda could get through, and it must also be plausible to appoint that Senator. Empty chairs piss people off as well. I'm not sure many states could garner a 2/3's agreement always. Not saying it should be 51%, but perhaps just a bit smaller than 2/3's. Sounds nice. All very good standards, which I agree with. Ahh, less of a buddy-driven senate deal? Good thinking. How would they consider: who's on the committe, what numbers are they going to consist of, how are interests represented relatively? Sounds like you've been thinking about this, so I would love to know how to fill in the gaps. Overall, I would say you're giving a good sell to your perspective. It's not common for people in this forum (and many others) to offer a clear direction. I commend you for it.
Thanks for the kudos. I've been politically oriented for quite some time, and only recently have taken more of the activist role in attempting to redirect our present course away from what I believe is certain disaster. Now you've gone and asked me the most difficult question right off the bat. Who's on the committee, or rather, how are they selected. Interested people submit applications to the county mayor/board of supervisors or whatever governing body there is for that county. Each county reviews their candidates for the committe and selects the one they find most qualified to fill the committee seat. So the answer to your question about how many is answered by how many counties there are in a particular state. That also answers your question about how interests are represented relatively because they are like delegates representing the views from the local (well county anyway) level. I will let you know when I get my political website up and running. I've read many threads where you have given your political viewpoints and I've got you pegged as a level headed thinking sort of fellow. I'd love to have you be an active participant/moderator on that site if you are interested.
Thanks for the compliment. I may very well take up that offer. Let me know when it's up, and I will surely poke my head in. PM me in other words. ------------------------------------------------------- Ps...I said that compliment (about you), because I think now-a-days, more than anything, we need leadership-like qualities....even if it's just a forum. We need people discussing ideas, and how to effectively make them a reality, rather than just making remarks against things. Our founders did have their own cross-opinions about things they didn't like, but when it came to steping-up to the plate, they did...the Constitution itself was the emblem of that leadership. I'm sure there are better places and times, but even here it's nice to see.
Thank you. I agree with you that we need fewer complainers and more doers. My vision for my website is a first step in attempting to garner more attention for viable third party candidates.--I will PM you when it's ready.