Changes badly needed in the U.S. political system

IMO, this country made a big mistake when it term limited the President to two terms in the aftermath of what looked like the "forever presidency of FDR." This restricted only the executive branch of the government. My point is, if you want to term limit either do it to all 3 branches of the goivernment or don't do it at all. It is high time that members of congress be term limited. Some of them have served longer than they would have in private or public sector jobs. Some literally sat on their senate or house seat until they went to their graves. I have no idea how sharp their mental and other faculties were at that ripe old age. Likewise, IMO, iot is ridiculous to give life time tenure to judges. They ought to retire at 80 or 85 or some such age and give way to younger, more energetic talent of which there is plenty available. Federal Elections, especially that of POTUS, members of the House and Senate, ought to be a very serious business, conducted and supervised by a federal bi-partisan election commission. The one goal of the process ought to be maximum participation by legitimate citizens of the country who are eligible to vote. This means every voter must present proof of citizenship, either passport, or driver's license, or photo ID. The driver license and photo ID have been recently enhanced to e=include extra security features and it is possible to include citizenship status in the magnetic strip. I find it depressing that both political parties are trying to either suppress the vote or let anyone vote without proof of eligibility. They ought to instead try and increase the likelihood of the genuine voter actually casting their ballot. The constitution of the USA was adopted in 1789, when this country was primarily agrarian, far different from what it is today. There is nothing sacrosanct about the first Tuesday in November. That could be changed to a weekend in late Summer such as in August. All other political activities, such as primaries, conventions, etc. will have to adjust to the new time table. Votes shall not be counted until the entire USA has finished voting. That includes Alaska, Hawaii and Guam. The elctions are not conducted to enable the media to do their exit surveys and blabber endlessly about thde reasons for the results. They are conducted to maintain a robust democracy. It is simply wrong to bias the voting inclinations of the voter in California or Hawaii by releasing the results from New York or Massachussets before voting is over in California. The Federal Election commission should be empowered to punish media that violate these rules. Allowing state legislatures to gerrymander congressional and state legislature constituencies makes a mockery of fair representation. Again, sta-level election commission should conduct and supervise the process. It is ridiculous that the country that started the computer revolution and continues to be the leading edge of high tech, takes so long to conduct the election process and declare the rsults.

The lack of fairness in electing the POTUS!

I have just completed 26 years as a faculty member in one of the largest public universities of Texas. Arriving in August 1979 as a what may be justifiably called “dirt poor” graduate student, I have spent all but my first semester in the USA in Texas. While politics is not my bread and butter, I have been a citizen for 12 years and am a keen observer of the political process in America, one whom you could call the typical “political junkie”. Most of the following observations apply to national politics in the USA, but some are relevant specifically to Texas.

I am amazed that for the past 30 years, there has been hardly any active campaigning activity during Presidential elections in Texas, the third largest and one of the fastest growing states. Typically, early in the process, our state gets written off as a “______ state” and forgotten after that. This year, the same can be said of California, New York, Illinois, and now Michigan as well. All have been classified as the “property” of one party or the other. I find it astounding that the President of the USA can be elected without actively seeking and getting the endorsement of the people of the four largest states in the country. I do know that it happens because of the Electoral College arithmetic and content that it is time to change this flawed procedure in the process of electing our President. One sure fair procedure would be to assign the electoral votes based on % of popular votes polled by each candidate. Another would be to assign based on performance in each congressional district. My own preference would be to completely do away with the Electoral College and elect the people’s President directly, based on the people’s verdict. If any of these three alternatives is implemented, there will be a sea change in campaigning, with nothing short of dog fights breaking out to do well in CA, NY, TX, IL and MI. Now, I can see the question coming: what about the smaller states. My answer to that is: they are well protected by the “Great Compromise” that gives them 2 senators each, resulting in some instances, 2 senators and one congressperson from a state! This provides solid protection to the small states in resource allocation issues. Electing the President, on the other hand, is the right of every citizen and in my opinion, those living in large states are also entitled to have a meaningful experience of the process. What I have been seeing in Texas for the past 30 years is a joke!