Outflanking McCain on "Reform"

While it no longer seems as if John McCain's media-sensation VP pick Sarah Palin can pull enough white women voters to the Republican ticket to prevent Barack Obama from being elected, there is one more gambit that he could attempt, to lend superficial credence to his claim of being a "reformer" -- in his apparent strategy to out-change Obama, the inventor of the "change" brand in this cycle. He could give a speech at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia and propose significant structural reforms in the federal government itself, in order to bring "real change" to Washington. I predict that unless Barack Obama outflanks McCain in proposing a major package of changes in the way that our government represents the people, McCain just might try something like this. While it would be recognized by the political class as a campaign gambit rather than a sincere initiative, it could work with independent voters who dislike both parties and want a real shake-up in Washington.

From Obama, a serious proposal for significant changes in the way government functions would put beef on the plate of his claim to represent real change, and he'd be offering a solution that's proportionate to the indictment he's made about government today. A majority of Americans believe that an increasingly corrupt and ineffective Congress and executive branch – which mainly serve the interests of those who can buy access to policymakers – should be returned to the control of the people. That requires changes not only of personnel in Washington, but of how and when voters pass judgment on candidates for federal office.

Here's my proposed package, of statutory and constitutional changes: (1) Each citizen must be given the right to vote for president (a right they do not now possess, according to the Supreme Court's 2000 decision in Bush v. Gore, which said that state legislatures make the rules for presidential elections), to have each person's vote counted, and to have that vote counted equally (requiring direct election of the president by national popular vote and abolition of the Electoral College); (2) All contributions for campaigns for national office (president and congress) must be limited to citizens – no organizations of any kind should be permitted to contribute money -- so that people, not interests, control Washington; (3) A recountable paper trail must be established nationally for all electronic voting systems, and such systems should be standardized nationally for federal elections; and (4) Concurrent presidential and House terms of four years should be created, with a four-term limit on House members and a three-term limit on members of the Senate, with a procedure for mid-term special-recall elections for the House and the President. The people themselves must be given the means of breaking the influence of special interests. The breakdown of democracy can only be fixed by strengthening the central position of the people in how our system works.

The announcement of such proposals by either candidate would surprise the media, galvanize the support of undecided independent voters, and dramatically establish that candidate as the unquestionable leader in bringing more change to American elections and American government since at least the time when women were given the right to vote.