HILLARY MARRIES BERNIE
I wrote about it previously, but I think it needs clarification. The progressive community needs to press the definition of what is allowable in the selection of our next President (P) and Vice President (VP). The rules for filling the positions are simple (citizenship, residency, age), and have been accepted to suggest that individuals must fill each job. But I don’t see any reason why, in practice, a team of leaders cannot achieve all the better, unified ends.
The entire idea of a REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY assumes that we have token leaders, individuals who fill the slots that mirror the voices of their collective. Under a “confederated” presidency and vice-presidency, the same would happen except that the individuals would be more open as the figureheads of a collection of smart folks with specific ideas to achieve -- pragmatic administrative and executive directions. Once such individuals are properly elected following the existing rule, they can easily stay true to their unified ideas as long as they follow other Constitutional and executive rules and regulations. It wouldn’t be the much different from what the registered parties do in campaign mode, except that this advisory team is about progress, action, success and team input in doing their work, not raising money and complying with every outside stakeholder or interest factor. In theory, I can't see why there would be any problem with an immediate past P or VP joining the team as an extension of sustaining a smooth foothold into a new administration.
Hypothetically, what this could mean in practice might play out like this: our new Confederate President (whom we might call Hillary) would work in full partnership with an Independent VP (say, a Bernie), who together would be the figurehead leaders of the greater advisory body of a few vocal and respected others (let’s call one Elizabeth, for example), who would spend the campaign time outlining, sharing, debating and recommending ideas for the individual tokens to stay true to once the individuals were duly elected. CP Hillary would win the title, pay and benefits -- and be the final arbitrator of disputes in practice -- but IVP Bernie could carry on with nearly equivalent passions and convictions grounded in the core expectations offered by the full team. Technically, all decisions would be signed off on my the CP and then used by her and the IVP to further their transparent collective efforts, but it would quickly become obvious that they were in the same game together, making them a great example of a the new shape of a fair, just and equitable Confederated Presidency.
The US doesn’t have -- and its Founders might not have envisioned -- a team leadership model like this; and there are technical issues the IVP would face regarding the use of the word confederate. But, with the integration of new interactive and participatory technologies, we have to learn to adapt the voting system to our immediate and better needs. The Democrat and Republican operatives can still continue their fundraising and stakeholder appeasement requirements, but hopefully not at the expense of getting work accomplished.
Upload those thoughts, please. Lawyers and historical quibbleists, line up to the right.
