40
Was the 12th amendment a mistake? (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.ca
46 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Before the 12th amendment, the presidential candidate who got the second most electoral votes became the vice president. This meant they were usually different parties.

It occurred to me that one thing this achieved was always ensuring that there was someone in the room who would be willing to disagree with the president. He couldn't surround himself with yes-men.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 12 points 2 months ago (7 children)

Expanding the power of the executive branch is a big part of the problem.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 5 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    it would not be expanding it would be slicing up the responsibility among several.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 10 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    You misunderstand, the executive branch WAS expanded too much. It never was meant to have much of the powers it does now. So yes, one person does have more than they should.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 5 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    certainly. I think though even the initial powers should have been split. I think also deparment heads should have terms and be only removed by acts of congress. basically they sould be independent and the president can initiate termination by asking congress to act.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    What if congress formed the cabinet?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    they kinda do. they authorize it and decide if a selection is hired for the job. this would just take them into also be part of firing so that they can be more independent in their actions. They actually can be impeached now though. I was thinking more that you reverse the firing so that they don't have to worry as much. so a president brings up a canidate to congress and they say yeah or nay. I would add he presents the need to remove a canidate and they say nay or yeah.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [โ€“] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    Good point. I like that. I'd want congress to appoint cabinet members with a veto option from the president with the standard two-thirds vote to override. President can fire pending approval of congress with a simple majority or congress can impeach directly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [โ€“] 2 points 2 months ago

    problem with congress appointing is there are so many people that have to be vetted. not impossible but would need to be done by committee. so it makes sense to have the president propose a canidate that then needs to get the congressional votes to ascend. of course trump did a lot with interim people.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent