Adjusting the U.S. Election Process – Should that be done and if so, what kind of adjusting should take place to bring this and other related areas of the U.S. Constitution into the 21st Century. No easy task, no easy solutions, and one of the most important elements in this whole process is YOU.
Without your input and your standing up to be counted, the founding fathers of the Constitution will be judged to be right on one count and wrong on another.
“THE FEAR of the ‘common people’ that drove America’s founders had obvious results in the Constitution. Presidents were elected by a small Electoral College without a popular vote, the Senate was filled with the choice of state legislatures and not the people, the electorate was kept tiny and discriminatory select. Indirect representative democracy held pure democracy at bay.”
“Given the lack of broad-based education, the widespread poverty of the eighteenth century America, and the absence of any successful contemporary democratic precedents, perhaps the founders’ fears were at least partly justified. None of these conditions prevails today, however. Never in the history of mankind have a people been so well educated, with so many sources of information available at instant command”.
“The founders themselves would have been the first to express amazement, and puzzlement, that their country had not had the self-confidence to reexamine their labors at regular intervals.”
(This is taken from Larry J. Sabato’s book A More Perfect Constitution).
Should we fail to make the necessary adjustments that take into consideration the differences that prevailed when the Constitution was formed and today’s America, then they should be judged as right to have ‘feared the common people’.
Should we fail to bring our laws of the land and our Constitution into today, they will be judged as wrong when they foresaw that their labors of developing the Constitution would be changed to
Every election is always different from another. But there is a thing that is the same for every election – it is the reason American people vote. Americans vote because they want their country to have a decent leader, a man that will do everything possible to promote theirs country position in the world’s politics in the first place. They cannot stay out of that, because every vote counts and they know it. There is also another reason American people vote, it especially concerns those, who are not good at observing what is going on in the Senate now. Such people usually vote by tradition without really getting into the essence of the deal. It is more than just knowing the political party candidate when it comes to participating in the elections. Even in America, where the two party system exists it is still a problem to make people know whom they are voting for. This system has been used in the United States for a long time. Its roots lead to the very moment of the first ratification of the Constitution. At that moment two political parties were defined – the Federalist Party and the Anti-Federalist Party. Soon it became a tradition and it happened because this system was pretty good in use. It was easier for people to have only two options. So since 1895 the Republican and the Democratic parties became the major dominants in American politics. This system gives the opportunity to choose from only two candidates for President of the United States. This actually shows that this system in not probably the best when it comes to elections, but it is traditionally fixed. What it really does – it simplifies the process of voting. You either vote for the Republicans who are conservative, or for Democrats who are liberal. It has been historically proved that the appearance of the third party causes political splits like it happened when Theodore Roosevelt decided to form the Progressive party in 1912 but most of the time due to the in difference of the voters to them the other parties get no support. Talking about elections it is very important to point out the Electoral College. The reason of its foundation was the difference in electing the president by popular vote and by Congress. Such things caused and still cause a lot of troubles during the elections. The Electoral College was called as a compromise between these two. Its structure is obviously well built. It consists of 538 electors. Each one goes for each of the 435 members of the House of Representatives and 100 Senators plus three for the District of Columbia. The number of electors is equal to of House members to which it is entitled. The electors are originally chosen by the political parties. During the elections each state gives the Governor prepares seven original Certificates of Ascertainment. A Certificate of Ascertainment is a list of these electors for the candidate that got the majority of the votes. Then the copies are sent to House of Congress. It is necessary to have 270 electoral votes to elect the President or Vice President. And the electors are not obligated to vote the same way as the majority of their state did. So the Electoral College runs in order to make the elections more objective.
On October 25th – The Ukrainians will vote for a new Political Leader – Building a United Ukraine
Ukrainians were to vote on January 17th 2010 for a new president. However the Ukrainian Parliament voted overwhelmingly on April 1st 2009, to keep the presidential elections on October 25 2009, three months ahead of the end of President Viktor Yushchenko’s first term of office.
Why did the parliament vote for this early election date? There are more than one answer to this. The front runners for president see a threat in a new rising candidate which will gain by more time, and they want to cut him short of this so he does not win to much votes. Another explanation is that the Ukrainian politicians up till now have not shown much strategic leadership and lack of crisis management, and this is not only limited to the top leaders in Ukraine, but the whole parliament.
Ukraine is in a need for a change in political leadership as the present leadership consisting of the president and prime minister does not provide the leadership Ukraine needs at this moment. Ukraine present political crisis is a struggle between two heads of power and Ukraine’s future as a European Parliamentary Democracy. In addition there is an ambitious opposition with the party of regions leader, who will do his best to get into power, mostly because of personal ambitions. An opposition leader which has a scandal filled background in Ukrainian politics.
Razumkov Center performed a poll in the period from February 2th until March 5th 2009 revealed six potential presidential alternatives amongst the population, these were;
Viktor Yanukovych, Yulia Tymoshenko, Arseniy Yatseniuk, Volodymyr Lytvyn, Petro Symonenko, and Viktor Yuschenko
Amongst these candidates there is only one real choice for a visionary leadership which will contribute to form the independent strong Ukraine which gives the population hopes for the future. This candidate is the 34 year old economist and lawyer Arseniy Yatseniuk. He is the candidate which has risen fastest in popularity in the last few months and gains terrain towards his opponents for every day towards the presidential election in January 2010. The other candidates have not demonstrated the ability to unite Ukraine either in power position, nor as opposition politicians. More of the same medicine will not work any longer for Ukraine. Like the international crisis, there is a need for new tools that will prevent Ukraine having the same problems over and over again.
ARSENIY YATSENIUK STANDS FOR BUILDING A NEW UNITED UKRAINE
Arseniy Yatseniuk can build a new sense of national unity that will bring relatively scandal free politics forward and he represent the next generation of a new post-partisan Ukrainian leadership. He represents the transformational figure which emerges in the Ukrainian political landscape that captures the imagination and majority of Ukrainian voters towards the January 2010 national elections. Arseniy Yatsenyuk is the one leader who is uniquely positioned to save Ukraine from itself. His meteoric rise is altering the political terrain of the upcoming elections in Ukraine. Since Yatsenyuk has entered the race, he will have a challenging race towards presidency. But he can also campaign and spur optimism in Ukraine and bring hope back to the distressed population.
Ukraine is required to present balanced governmental budgets. The president must ensure that all politicians, regardless of fraction work together towards a common goal â saving Ukraine. In order to achieve this the new leader must be ready to take actions within the energy politics, especially Naftogas and its inability to present positive capital results as well as be able to open up its operations to be able to control its use of capital. Another issue the president needs to take care of is to handle the level of corruption in Ukraine.
Yushenko and Tymochenko have demonstrated lack of coherent leadership and ability to present a common political platform. They have therefore as I see it, disqualified themselves as candidates to be the needed future visionary political presidential leader of Ukraine. The apparent lack of proper political craftsmanship in the formation of the Orange Coalition between Yushenko and Tymoshenko has lead to disagreement on virtually everything since they took the power in 2004.
The inability of the opposition leaders to present a real alternative to the present day leadership also disqualifies them from taking part in the new leadership of Ukraine. Today the major opposition party, party of regions is more occupied with criticize the existing government and president for not making a crisis plan and anti-crisis solutions, instead of cooperate with the leadership to create one.
BUILDING A UNITED UKRAINE WITH A VISIONARY MODERN LEADER
The new President to be elected in October 25th needs the trust by vast numbers of Ukrainians and not seen as part of the problem and not fatigued by a constant fighting within the political leader collegiumâs of the President, Prime Minister and the chairman of Verkhovna Rada. The new Ukrainian leader must muster enough parliamentary seats and nationwide support to forge an effective coalition government and lead a genuine reform movement.
Yanukovych is facing a backlash in his party and polls for fumbling the last attempt to depose Timoshenko from the prime ministers office.
Arseniy Yatsenyuk can break out as a uniting force to save Ukraine.
The political fighting between Yushenko, Yanukovych and Tymoshenko demonstrate their inabilities in proper visionary political leadership on the cost of retaining personal powers.
Ukraine is sinking and Yatsenyukâs poll numbers and popularity are rising. As a former banker, Ukraineâs Minister of Foreign Affairs and Speaker of the parliament, the 34 year-old Yatsenyuk is experienced and respected in Ukraineâs political arena. He is young, relatively scandal free and has the best chance to represent the next generation of a new post-partisan Ukrainian leadership.
Yatsenyuk represent the sober visionary leader who can impart a new sense of realism that implores Ukraine to clean up its own financial house.
He has charisma enough to inspire Ukrainians to take their destiny in their own hands and not look to Europe or Russia for salvation or blame them when things go wrong.
He must challenge the reign in Ukraineâs oligarchs who have ravaged the country in the same way that Russiaâs oligarchs did during the transition from state ownership to free enterprise.
Yatsenyuk has the ability to craft a sensible forward-leaning Ukrainian energy policy that modernizes its infrastructure, energy policy reforms and restores its credibility in Europe.
Yatsenyuk articulate a vision that bridges the cultural and religious divide between Ukraine and Russian nationals.
He has demonstrated the capability to lead a parliament to get things done, and should therefore be able to govern a parliament with a significant numbers of members from the Tymoshenko Bloc and the Regions Party on his side.
The Ukrainian people are in a desperate search for new leadership as his political rivalâs incessant infighting makes him a more attractive alternative.
POLITICAL STRATEGY â CHANGE UKRAINE THROUGH ITS CITIZENS
Yatsenyuk gives a clear and compelling vision of a new Ukraine, and a new theory of nation-building that departs with the failed attempts of the past.
Yatsenyuk has the ability to find alliances that will assist him in rise funding for his campaign for his newly formed party called Change Front Citizens Initiative.
Yatsenyuk will form a program for Ukraineâs resurrection. His political strategy will be innovative, and be the consensus in the Ukrainian population as well as within the political circles. His party will present solutions that not only split the political difference between the major parties, but being radical pragmatists proposing solutions that benefit all Ukrainians struggling under severe economic conditions. He will not allow his party to become a soft centrist alternative which tries to be all things to all Ukrainians.
Yatsenyuk is seen as a political threat to established politicians like Yanukovych, and Tymoshenko, who have started attacking Yatsenyuk instead of ignoring him. This will provide an excellent development that provides him greater opportunities to highlight policy differences and new reforms, rather than engaging in personal smears.
Yatsenyuk can and will have to be tough in taking on his detractors; he cannot be equally as dirty.
Yatsenyuk stated recently: “I have ambitions as a politician â I want to change entire country and I do not want to change the National Bank”.
Yatsenyukâs new organization the Change Front Citizens Initiative will build its own independent base of disaffected citizens and Ukraineâs youth that are anchored to his core vision. He will break off sections of Ukraineâs other major and minor parties on principle and policy to forge a winning coalition as the January 17 elections draw near.
Yatsenyukâs path to victory will be the end of the political rancor between the Region’s Party and the Tymoshenko Bloc, and build a new sense of national unity.
Arseniy Yatsenyuk represents the change that will build the modern democratic Ukraine with the initiative of the Ukrainians themselves.
He has a background as civil engineer and geoscientist. He has worked mainly within the oil and gas industry from the mid 1980s. He has written a few fictional novels as well as being the author of some professional litterature within oil and gas sector, he is now an editor of some web sites.
A quick explanation of American politics. Video Rating: 4 / 5