[logfromblammo]

A realistic route to implementation was not one of the requirements. If it is, the only solution is pretty much to eject Washington DC from the planet, fill in the hole, and start over.

And I explicitly said the office would remain empty. If an incumbent runs unopposed, the new option would be the way to force their party to pick someone else, since obviously no one had the moxie or political capital to challenge in the primary.

If it is important that the office be filled, it is important that the parties run candidates qualified to fill it. In light of recent events, I'd rather have no elected official or a temporary placeholder than a bad official. It would seem that our government has a limited capacity to operate rationally even when the person nominally in charge is incompetent or non compos mentis. It certainly happened in the later years of the Reagan administration. It might be happening now.

Europe has proved that short election cycles are possible. We could survive six weeks of vacancy in most offices while cranking out a mulligan election. And where it really counts, existing succession plans apply. We could certainly run one mulligan between November and January, and if another one is required, Congress still has time to pick their Speaker of the House before inauguration day, who would then have to take the office until an election finally succeeds in naming a full-term replacement.

The sheer panic, expense, and inconvenience of the first time would likely encourage the parties to not run crap candidates in the future.

[geofft]

> A realistic route to implementation was not one of the requirements.

I said "(Unless you have a realistic way of introducing good)" - I meant that the way of introducing it must be realistic, not simply that the good must be realistic. (Let me know if I could have phrased that more clearly!)

[logfromblammo]

There are many ways to pass legislation that are not clearly in the best interests of the legislators. Lobbying, logrolling, stealth amendment, procedural gambit, grassroots effort, convincing rhetoric, sound argument, blackmail....

Any one of those might work.

But you don't always have unlimited attempts, so it's still worth considering the amount of resistance a sound, sensible, rational solution to a real, obvious problem that affects every constituent might face in the typical congressperson, especially when the problem at hand is the prevalence of congresspersons stubbornly obstructing bills that would benefit the whole population at their expense.