Election day was two days ago, but still no confirmed winner. How might a presidential election be different when the House of Representatives takes on the form of a canton forum?
The President is head of the executive branch of government. It should not be a political position. His purpose is to execute the policies proposed by Congress. Clearly, it is most important that the President has a good working relationship with Congress, and this can most easily be accomplished if that office is filled by someone chosen by Congress. If the House of Representatives takes the form of a Canton forum, they represent as a whole every taxpayer, making them even more representative of the citizenry than the Electoral College. If the various champions proposed candidates, the winner would be the one chosen by the coalition of cantons representing a plurality of citizens. Simple yet effective. And a canton forum is like a multi-party system, which gets rid of many of the most contentious absurdities of politics. If the forum is as effective as I imagine it could be in right-sizing the federal government (which would most certainly make it much smaller), the President would have a smaller, more streamlined bureaucracy to deal with. Win, win, win!
The purpose of government is to allow people to cooperate in accomplishing deeds that the majority find necessary.
Federations are a manifestation of the natural law principle of subsidiarity. The Dolphin canton takes this principle very seriously. What that means practically is that, whenever any national government program is being reviewed, the first question asked will be: can this be better handled at a lower level of government (such as the state, county, municipality, or perhaps outside of government altogether)? If the question is answered in the affirmative, the canton will not be supporting the program at the national level, though it may support whatever assistance may be needed to transfer the program to whatever level may be judged more appropriate. Isn't this making things worse for the taxpayer? Probably not. National programs such as Medicare are so rife with corruption that pushing the program down to a lower level will probably result in better oversight. In addition, this provides the possibility of innovation, which a single top-heavy national program will squelch. Economies of ...
One of the top stories in the news today is about the US Supreme Court hearing arguments of an abortion case that may result in a reversal of Roe v Wade. As the interim champion of the Dolphin canton [1], I would not support government giving money to Planned Parenthood. It should be clear that opposition to abortion will never go away, which means that Roe v Wade, like Plessy v Ferguson (1886), went beyond where the people really stand on the issues. Plessy v Ferguson allowed segregated schools in some instances. This was reversed by Brown v Board of Education (1954).
There are two things in my mind that make it impossible to accept the right of abortion. First, it is clear from biology that the very first cell produced by the joining of the sperm and egg cells (the zygote) has a genetic signature different from both parents. This continues to be true throughout the period where it is called an embryo until the birth of a new human being. Therefore, the fetus is not part of the woman, but ...
