As indicated by my critiques, we are “boxed in” in many dimensions. We need to put some “un-PC” and problematic ideas on the table in order to get to useful solutions. Here are some of the most interesting and radical proposals:
- We need a fundamental overhaul of the U.S. Constitution. The current document, written for an 18th-century society, is outdated for the 21st century. How about a "30-year expiration cycle" for the Constitution, which could adapt the political society's premises to changing circumstances and, more broadly, institutionalizing the idea of explicit and democratic constitutional change (consistent with Jefferson's argument for generational revisions). For example, we need "new constitutional convention" ("ConCon.2") to reconceptualize the United States and ensure democratic representation, combining both substantive changes, a comprehensive approach, and a point of engagement for our civic culture.
- To address democratic deficits, we need to change the structure of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate.
- For the House, he suggests districts of 40,000 people, which would mean, for example, San Francisco having 22 representatives, offering a vision of "community representation".
- For the Senate, he tackles the issue of skewed representation by suggesting that each state could have one senatorial seat (including D.C. and Puerto Rico), with the balance of seats distributed based on population. He also explores the use of proportional representation for at least part of legislative selection, allowing voters to define and choose their affiliations rather than being demarcated solely by geographic residence.
- Other models include shifting to full or proportional representation in each house.
- n response to current political dysfunction and potential future chaos, The Emergency Action and Government Efficacy Restoration (EAGER) Act of 2029, would grant a presumably Democratic-controlled Congress the authority to suspend some normal rules to rapidly repair damage and implement new policies. This includes authorizing the appointment of interim officials without Senate confirmation for up to two years and allowing for the expedited implementation of regulations without the usual Administrative Procedures Act processes.
- Globally, we might try an updated version of the United Nations' "trusteeship" model for countries unable to function as coherent communities. This model would require affected territories to "surrender their 'sovereignty' for a period" to gain stability, undergoing a process that would lead to restored independence and improved living conditions. This radical concept challenges accepted myths of the modern global political system, including continuous political progress and self-determination. This would be overseen by a governing structure with a direct voice for affected peoples through supervised elections, alongside UN and supporting country representatives.
- Climate change as the world's most dire threat and existing approaches are insufficient. While acknowledging the importance of large-scale governmental and corporate efforts, we need to engage ordinary people at a "small bite" level, similar to the UNICEF milk-carton program for children. Marketing and advertising experts to make "carbon fun/engaging/interesting," creating catchy phrases and mascots to connect with the public, much like selling consumer goods. "Nature-based solutions" like tree-planting and carbon sequestration, can make demonstrable progress while not requiring radical attitudinal shifts on the part of populations or governments.
- The current two-party system in the U.S. as "stale, corrupt, and well past their 'sell-by' dates". We need a "re-shuffle" that would "energize the process and allow for new leadership, new alliances, and new ideas to emerge". Let’s "toss out the Ds and the Rs (or, at least, not preventing their implosion)" as a good start to foster a new political culture of engagement.
RSS Feed