Which offices should be publicly elected offices?

[Blahface]

I don't like the idea of electing the Secretary of State, Treasurer, Attorney General, etc. I especially don't like electing judges. A lot of people don't even know enough to make informed decisions about electing governors or representatives; how can we expect them to make any sort of judgment on these more specific offices that nobody really pays attention to?

I think we should only elect people to write legislation or people who make decisions on who gets appointed to executive positions. On the latter part, I don't just mean the Governor or President. I wouldn't mind taking away the power of the upper house to write legislation and replace it with more executive power in which they elect candidates that the Governor/President would normally just appoint with the upper house's approval. The election process would have to be structured fairly though to ensure it is a centrist candidate that can win. We don't want the winner to just be the majority of the majority.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How about a totally different approach: *NO* office is elected.

Instead, you elect the hiring committee. They put qualified people in the jobs and then go home.

This would go a long ways to eliminating the current problem that you have to be charismatic to get elected but that's generally not a useful job skill in the position you're elected to.

 

[bilby]

How about a totally different approach: *NO* office is elected.

Instead, you elect the hiring committee. They put qualified people in the jobs and then go home.

This would go a long ways to eliminating the current problem that you have to be charismatic to get elected but that's generally not a useful job skill in the position you're elected to.

It doesn't seem to have been very effective at eliminating that problem with respect to the Presidency; The members of the electoral college don't even get a mention during the process, which is all about the candidate they have pledged to appoint if they are elected.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How about a totally different approach: *NO* office is elected.

Instead, you elect the hiring committee. They put qualified people in the jobs and then go home.

This would go a long ways to eliminating the current problem that you have to be charismatic to get elected but that's generally not a useful job skill in the position you're elected to.

It doesn't seem to have been very effective at eliminating that problem with respect to the Presidency; The members of the electoral college don't even get a mention during the process, which is all about the candidate they have pledged to appoint if they are elected.

Because the electoral college is a joke these days, it's only real purpose is to serve as firewall. I'm talking about a system more akin to what we had at first with the electoral college.

 

[Rhea]

We elect our Coroner. Go figure.
And our Highway Superintendant - whose only qualifications are that s/he be registered to vote and a town citizen. Then, here are the keys to the excavator.

 

[dismal]

I don't like the idea of electing the Secretary of State, Treasurer, Attorney General, etc.

These people are the president's staff. It can't make sense to have them be people who do not support the president's agenda.

I especially don't like electing judges.

The implicit premise of democracy is we trust the voters. If we don't trust voters we should probably come up with a system that limits their power. Like maybe some sort of document that limits what the government can do that we take very seriously.

 

[Ojuice5001]

It doesn't seem to have been very effective at eliminating that problem with respect to the Presidency; The members of the electoral college don't even get a mention during the process, which is all about the candidate they have pledged to appoint if they are elected.

Because the electoral college is a joke these days, it's only real purpose is to serve as firewall. I'm talking about a system more akin to what we had at first with the electoral college.

That's just it. The electoral college turned into what it is because the media disseminates so much information about the candidates, which people care about far more than they care about the electors. Why wouldn't the same evolution happen with lots of the appointed offices as well, under this newly designed system.

 

[barbos]

People are idiots, there is nothing you can do about it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Because the electoral college is a joke these days, it's only real purpose is to serve as firewall. I'm talking about a system more akin to what we had at first with the electoral college.

That's just it. The electoral college turned into what it is because the media disseminates so much information about the candidates, which people care about far more than they care about the electors. Why wouldn't the same evolution happen with lots of the appointed offices as well, under this newly designed system.

I'm thinking of a system where you don't even have candidates--the positions are filled like jobs. We just elect the people that do the filling.

 

[bilby]

That's just it. The electoral college turned into what it is because the media disseminates so much information about the candidates, which people care about far more than they care about the electors. Why wouldn't the same evolution happen with lots of the appointed offices as well, under this newly designed system.

I'm thinking of a system where you don't even have candidates--the positions are filled like jobs. We just elect the people that do the filling.

Fun fact - every job application I have ever been involved with has had candidates.

I have not come across any jobs that are filled by randomly grabbing people off the streets - at least, not since the Royal Navy ended impressment in 1814.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm thinking of a system where you don't even have candidates--the positions are filled like jobs. We just elect the people that do the filling.

Fun fact - every job application I have ever been involved with has had candidates.

I have not come across any jobs that are filled by randomly grabbing people off the streets - at least, not since the Royal Navy ended impressment in 1814.

But do the people who select the HR people do so with any knowledge of who they will hire?

 

[Blahface]

How about a totally different approach: *NO* office is elected.

Instead, you elect the hiring committee. They put qualified people in the jobs and then go home.

This would go a long ways to eliminating the current problem that you have to be charismatic to get elected but that's generally not a useful job skill in the position you're elected to.

Do you mean all executive offices or are you counting representatives in the legislature as well?

Because the electoral college is a joke these days, it's only real purpose is to serve as firewall. I'm talking about a system more akin to what we had at first with the electoral college.

That's just it. The electoral college turned into what it is because the media disseminates so much information about the candidates, which people care about far more than they care about the electors. Why wouldn't the same evolution happen with lots of the appointed offices as well, under this newly designed system.

The devil is in the details. I think the EC became what it is now because the constitution gave wide latitude to the states on how to select their delegates. It might have been different if the EC was directly elected. Another big difference is that Loren's committee would be hiring multiple people and not just the President. Sometimes I wounder how different the system would be if we were to elect the individual EC delegates and allowed the EC to rank the candidates and use a Condorcet method to elect the President.

If you want to minimize the ability of the committee to do favoritism towards family or friends, you could have it so that each member on the committee gets to see one resume at a time at random without a name. There would be a public record of which resumes each member looked at and which ones that member recommended to the rest of the committee. Maybe you can have each member score a resume before they see the next one. This wouldn't totally eliminate favoritism, but it would make it harder to justify.

 

[barbos]

Do you mean all executive offices or are you counting representatives in the legislature as well?

Because the electoral college is a joke these days, it's only real purpose is to serve as firewall. I'm talking about a system more akin to what we had at first with the electoral college.

That's just it. The electoral college turned into what it is because the media disseminates so much information about the candidates, which people care about far more than they care about the electors. Why wouldn't the same evolution happen with lots of the appointed offices as well, under this newly designed system.

The devil is in the details. I think the EC became what it is now because the constitution gave wide latitude to the states on how to select their delegates. It might have been different if the EC was directly elected. Another big difference is that Loren's committee would be hiring multiple people and not just the President. Sometimes I wounder how different the system would be if we were to elect the individual EC delegates and allowed the EC to rank the candidates and use a Condorcet method to elect the President.

If you want to minimize the ability of the committee to do favoritism towards family or friends, you could have it so that each member on the committee gets to see one resume at a time at random without a name. There would be a public record of which resumes each member looked at and which ones that member recommended to the rest of the committee. Maybe you can have each member score a resume before they see the next one. This wouldn't totally eliminate favoritism, but it would make it harder to justify.

Resume, LOL. You had me right until that.
I doubt favoritism is such a big problem. The problem will be money, it will just shift to the members of that committee.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Resume, LOL. You had me right until that.
I doubt favoritism is such a big problem. The problem will be money, it will just shift to the members of that committee.

I think that would be a far lesser problem than the current situation.