In the political world, last Thursday May 6 the UK had a general election for the first time in about 5 years. The way the system works here is a Prime Minister can call an election at any time he or she chooses, but must do so within 5 years. Then-PM Gordon Brown's 5 years were to end sometime in June, so he called the election for May 6. From a campaign system, I am a big fan of the British system. In the US, as most of you are aware, the campaigning season never really ends. Within a matter of months (and sometimes days) after an election, candidates are already fundraising and scheming for the next election. This is a product of the fact that we have general or mid-term elections every 2 years, in which the entire House of Representatives, 1/3 of the Senate, about 1/3 of the Governors, and in the general elections, the Presidency are all up for grabs. As if that wasn't confusing enough, states hold primary elections months in advance in order to decide who will even be on the ballot, and in all seriousness, the campaign never really ends. In the UK, the Prime Minister gives 30 days notice of an election. Once that happens, Parliament is dissolved, and the campaign jumps into full-speed chaos mode for all 30 days before the election is held. The three main party leaders held three election debates, and for the most part they traveled all over the UK soliciting support and so on.
Now, there are many arguments against this being applied in the US. First, the idea that someone could cross the United States in 30 days is obviously not possible. From a sheer geographic standpoint, you just couldn't do it. Also, another major problem is that because the US has fixed term limits, we know years in advance exactly when the elections will be held, and candidates position themselves and plan accordingly. The cost of elections in the US is also staggering, and it simply wouldn't be possible to raise the money needed to spread a major candidate's message nationwide in such a short time frame. But what about, say, a 4 month limit? The election will be held say November 2nd. Why not restrict a candidate's ability to raise money and travel around, well, campaigning, to starting on July 2? Surely the four months from July 2-November 2 offers plenty of time to raise money, travel across the country (and surely an individual state or a district), debate the other candidates, and inform the electorate of their choices. Personally, I think four months is more than enough time, and the major benefit to this is that for the year and a half a Congressman is in office from the time of the previous election until July 2, they actually GOVERN, instead of concentrate so hard on politics and election cycles.
But what about party politics? Surely there has to be a primary election, right? You can't possibly be advocating for switching to a Parliamentary system of government?
To answer the last question first, no, I do not think a Parliamentary system would work well in the US. That said, I think another solution is increasing term limits. Representatives should have 3 year terms, the President a 6 year term, and the Senate can remain a 6 year term. Governors should also have 6 year terms. I think in this way, we spread out the elections more, allowing once again more time for actual GOVERNMENT and less time for campaigning and pandering. If we allow a 4 month cycle for campaigning before a general or mid-term election, then how about a 3 month cycle for campaigning before a primary election? If the primary election is March 2, then campaigning starts on December 2 at the absolute earliest. I think our government would be much more effective and responsive if the campaign season lasted an absolute maximum of 7 months every 3 years. Instead, it's currently more like 18 months out of every 24 months. This is something we can definitely learn from the Brits.
To answer the last question first, no, I do not think a Parliamentary system would work well in the US. That said, I think another solution is increasing term limits. Representatives should have 3 year terms, the President a 6 year term, and the Senate can remain a 6 year term. Governors should also have 6 year terms. I think in this way, we spread out the elections more, allowing once again more time for actual GOVERNMENT and less time for campaigning and pandering. If we allow a 4 month cycle for campaigning before a general or mid-term election, then how about a 3 month cycle for campaigning before a primary election? If the primary election is March 2, then campaigning starts on December 2 at the absolute earliest. I think our government would be much more effective and responsive if the campaign season lasted an absolute maximum of 7 months every 3 years. Instead, it's currently more like 18 months out of every 24 months. This is something we can definitely learn from the Brits.
Regarding the actual election hear, it has been quite historical, that's for sure. PM Gordon Brown's Labour Party was utterly defeated, and lost the right to govern. The Conservative Party won the most seats by far, but ended up short by about 20 seats from an outright majority. As such, after 5 days of negotiations, they formed a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats (the UK's "third party"), and David Cameron became Prime Minister a few days ago. But what of the five days when there was essentially nobody running the country? Well, PM Brown was still technically PM, and he won his seat, so he is still a Member of Parliament. But interestingly enough, it is the Queen who accepts the outgoing PM's resignation and then invites the incoming PM to take power. Thus, while the monarch generally takes a ceremonial role, the Queen had much more power last week during this "Hung Parliament" in which no single party was able to form a government. In any case, while I was hoping for a Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition with Ed Miliband as Prime Minister, best wishes to PM Cameron and the coalition to form a stable government. Perhaps regardless of all of this, the BNP didn't win a single seat, and to me, that's honestly the most important thing - keep the racist bastards out of any sort of power.
The FA Cup Final has started, and Chelsea is pressuring early...
In the NHL, the 30 teams were reduced to 16, then 8, and now only 4 remain, just 8 wins away from capturing the Stanley Cup. The Blackhawks, of course, are one of them, after absolutely destroying Vancouver 5-1 in Game 6, which was in Vancouver, and the Hawks open their next series against the San Jose Sharks in San Jose tomorrow. The game is a matinée, at 12pm pacific time, so 2pm central in Chicago, and 8pm BST here in London. Hallelujah! A reasonable start time! As such I will be sporting my Hawks apparel in a pub tomorrow night rooting for a huge Hawks victory! Out East, Montreal won an epic Game 7 against Pittsburgh. In this post-season, Montreal knocked out the President's Cup-winners Washington and defending Stanley Cup-champions Pittsburgh, both in Game 7's, on the road! Just amazing. Philadelphia, to their credit, also pulled off a major feat. Down 3-0 in their series against Boston, they won the final 4 games in a row to become the 3rd team in NHL history to come back from a 3-0 series deficit to win. The winners of the Chicago-San Jose and Montreal-Philadelphia series will meet each other in the Stanley Cup Finals. Obviously I desperately want Chicago to win, and if they do, I wouldn't be so picky as to say that I only want to play one team, but if I could pick, a series against Montreal would be incredible. Two original 6 teams. The Montreal heartbreak from the 1970's. USA vs. Canada. Canada vs. Quebec. So much history. In any case, let's win this Game 1 tomorrow out in San Jose, take back home ice advantage, and take it from there!
School and studying have been picking up the last few days. Yesterday I had a long review session all morning on Environmental governance, and then for 4 hours worked on the 2009 exam with some classmates. I literally stared at statistics for 4 straight hours yesterday afternoon. Anyway after getting up dizzy I called it a day, came back after lunch, and then...
Yesterday was the final scheduled launch of Space Shuttle Atlantis, on STS-132 to the International Space Station to deliver a Russian-made module to expand the research capacity of the station. The shuttle launched at 2:20pm eastern time, so 7:20pm here in London, and it sure looked like a beautiful day on the Florida coast! Just less than two years ago I was on the coast, watching Shuttle Discovery launch on STS-124 delivering Japanese-made Kibo to the ISS on another glorious day, and I will never forget how bright the flame was, and feeling the earth shake in the moments after the launch. Just incredible, and it makes me sad to think that after Atlantis gets home in a couple of weeks, there are only two more flights ever scheduled to launch. That said, I do understand retiring the Shuttle. It is the most complex machine ever built by humans, designed in the late-1970s, and the technology at present is so much more simple and yet more powerful than it was at that time. In truth, we need a new launch vehicle. The sad part is not really the fact that the Shuttle is being retired to the museums, but that we don't have a replacement vehicle ready to launch a few months later. The ARES-I test launch was a huge success several months ago, but President Obama scrapped the program when he released his budget, and as of yet, NASA and nobody else really knows anything that is going on, beyond wrapping up the shuttle program by the end of this year. The second-to-last launch is scheduled for September, and the final launch, which I am hoping to be at, for sometime in November.
Last week I got to see Kate, a friend of mine from the States who I have worked with a bunch of times with People to People. She took a week off of work to check out London and Edinburgh, and we got to grab dinner one night, and then we went to the Victoria & Albert Museum which was very cool. I had never been there before and it was one of the few I still had to get to. Like most of the museums here, it was free, and what impressed me the most were the Renaissance collection of plaster casts on display. Back in the 19th century, traveling from London to Florence to see Michelangelo's David wasn't as simple as hopping on a 2 hour flight or taking the train, like I did just a few weeks ago, and so the vast majority of people weren't able to see most of the magnificent sculptures and paintings that Europe had to offer. As such, there is a cast of David, one of Trajan's Column from Rome, a replica of Raphael's School of Athens, and many many other artworks that I was lucky enough to see the original's of just a few weeks ago. In fact, it was just 1 month ago today I was wandering around Rome, looking up at the Creation of Adam in the Sistine Chapel, dipping my hand in the Trevi fountain, and staring in wonder at the Pantheon. Roma, Roma, Roma... what a city! Other great exhibits in the Victoria & Albert Museum... Venician glass, global model architecture, and South Asian pottery.
The FA Cup Final ended up being crazy... in the first half, Chelsea hit FIVE posts but weren't able to score, and the half ended tied 0-0. In the second, Portsmouth attacked off the kick-off, and forced Chelsea to take a penalty. On the penalty kick, the Chelsea keeper made the save, and then just minutes later down at the other end Drogba finally put one in to put Chelsea up 1-0. Lampard later missed a Chelsea penalty opportunity, but Chelsea was able to preserve the 1-0 lead to win the final by a 1-0 final. As such, Chelsea won the double - what a season to become a Chelsea fan... a Premier League title and the FA Cup champions. Just awesome!
Well, that's a wrap for now... I'm off to a friend's tonight for some Apples to Apples (fun card game... look it up if you haven't heard of it). Tomorrow I'm off to a pub to see the Hawks game. Monday is my last day of revision classes! After that I literally have nothing formally scheduled until my first exam on June 2.
No comments:
Post a Comment