It's hardly an original position in the bloggers' realm that the American system of democracy is flawed in a variety of fundamental ways. It is also in no way novel to suggest myriad solutions to these problems, ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous. However, I'd like to think the hypothetical practicality of what I'm about to say will set me apart.

So, eight changes. Eight things that can be accomplished legislatively, right now, in the United States. Let's begin.

1. SCHEDULE ALL PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES IN EARLY MAY

Let's take a look at how we elect our Presidents in the existing system. Twelve to eighteen months before the general election, a bunch of guys (and maybe a woman or two) declare their candidacies and spend half a year picking corn in Iowa and trudging through snow in New Hampshire in order to attract the votes of the tiny sliver of the American populace who gets to pick our Presidential options. As the residents of those two states decide which candidates are "electable," so goes the nation.

Why do we do this? This is one of those rare, non-partisan issues -- both major parties face the same difficulties in primary season -- so shouldn't folks be looking to make some changes? The only people with a vested interest in the current system are the power brokers of Iowa and New Hampshire, surely a group that could be overwhelmed by, say, the power brokers of every other state.

The way we should do it is to run every state's primary on the same day, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in May. That's six months before the general election, which is plenty of time for the nominees to campaign; things don't begin in earnest until summer as it is. By contesting every state at the same time, candidates will be forced to address every state, or at least make strategic decision about what states they're to leave to the rest of the pack. More importantly, every state will get a chance to be heard without being unduly influenced by the results from states that vote early. Ironically, this scenario rescues the core idea of the electoral college, which has been lost almost since its implementation (more on this to come).

This will inevitably lead to brokered conventions. If all the nation's Democrats had gone to the polls on January 19, the likelihood is that at least four candidates and maybe six would've won between 15% and 35% of the delegates. This is what scares party leaders shitless. A brokered convention -- especially if the other party has put together a unified convention -- is unpredictable and a potential media nightmare. Fuck it. I don't care. States can get together and do this, and they should.

2. REMOVE THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

OK, I know I'm not treading new ground here, but it needs to be said.

The framers of the Constitution didn't anticipate the rise of political parties, nor the rise of national candidates. In the 1780's, the electoral college made sense. Today, it does not. The argument that the electoral college forces candidates to campaign nationally does not hold water, as any Wyoming Democrat eager for an appearance by Al Gore in 2000 can tell you. More over, even if it did accomplish that, the fact is that the electoral college places a higher weight on the votes of small state residents than those of the average voter. The only purpose it can possibly serve is to subvert the will of the people and place in office an illegitimate President.

I tend to think that the only reason it survived the 2000 debacle is that people were able to rationalize it away as a freak occurence. But with the Bush and Kerry campaigns both testing highly focused electoral strategies -- strategies that completely de-emphasize popular victory -- it would not be surprising to see another popular/electoral split.

In fact, the electoral college is only part of the problem. Most people probably don't realize that if the college fails to produce one ticket with a majority (which would've happened in 2000 if, for instance, Florida's vote could not be certified by January 6, 2001), the President is chosen by the House of Representatives and the Vice-President is chosen by the Senate. Assuming a party-line vote, that would've resulted with Bush in the White House and Joe Lieberman in the OEOB -- the 50-50 Senate was still under the purview and tie-breaking power of Al Gore at the time.

If 2000 happens again, we'll find out if people are actually willing to make changes in this country. If the really ridiculous scenario plays out, well, I don't even know what to think. What we need is a system by which the popular vote is taken in early November, with a two-candidate run-off a couple weeks later. The down side is that independent candidates will have a tougher time getting onto the ballot -- even Ralph Nader in 2000 didn't get on in every state -- but the greater good outweighs it. Popular vote now.

3. PUSH LIGHT RAIL

Don't tell me Americans are too in love with the mythology of the automobile. Residents of New York, Boston, DC and Chicago seem to be just fine with taking trains around town all the time. We need to have these systems in more cities, with a better nationwide rail network connecting them. Want to get us off the white pony of foreign oil consumption? Install light rail and boost gas taxes. (See also: Removal of Vice-Presidents who claim we can have our cake and fuel our SUV's with it, too.)

4. REFORM CONGRESSIONAL RULES

Remember John McCain's Presidential bid? "Campaign finance reform, campaign finance reform, campaign finance reform." Dude, all right already, you want to be forgiven for being one of the Keating Five, we get it.

You may not have realized at the time that campaign financing was not the piece of the political machine most in need of maintenance. Despite the passage of McCain-Feingold, George Bush is going to raise a record-setting campaign warchest in 2004, and what the top Democrats have done so far isn't too shabby, either. The money is still there, and it always will be. Public funding can alleviate the problem to a certain extent, but it's not a complete solution. Our elected officials will continue to be beholden.

Meanwhile, the proposed controversial extensions to the PATRIOT Act which were very publicly withdrawn last year are now law. They were slipped into an intelligence appropriations bill which was already on the fast track, and the revised version of which was probably not even read by most who voted for it. The attachments of these "riders" is a major problem for an open democracy. I'm not going to pretend that I have the answer to this one, since Congressional rules are barely codified and subject to the whims of party leaders every two years. Somebody should put some rhetoricians to work coming up with an amendment that can do the work of keeping unrelated amendments out of proposed bills. In the meantime, let's float an amendment giving the President line-item veto power.

5. REPEAL THE 22ND AMENDMENT

Robert Byrd has been in the Senate for 84 consecutive terms, second only to Strom Thurmond's record 109. Other members of both Houses have also been around since roughly the time of Galileo. They have had a lot of time to perfect their craft, as have those who have dedicated their lives to issue- and interest-based lobbying. Those who have left Congress to become lobbyists, well, theirs is the power to rival that of Thor himself.

The President, on the other hand, has at most eight years in which to learn the job and do what he can with it. While a President's staff may be well-versed in the ins and outs of Washington (e.g. Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.), the President himself is likely not. Only three times have we elected a sitting member of Congress to the White House; our clear preference for Governors is likely an indication of our desire to bring fresh blood into the process. However, that fresh blood need not be naïve.

The idea of the 22nd amendment is valid -- the imperial Presidency is a dangerous possibility, and the advantage of incumbency lowers the bar for remaining in office. But why not implement a different version recently discussed by Bill Clinton, allowing former Presidents to sit out for a term or two before running again? In my opinion, there is not a true democracy that bars its citizens from choosing the most qualified of potential leaders, which is to say, those who've already held the job.

The imbalance in work experience could potentially be remedied by applying term limits to members of Congress, but that would only result in an inexperienced Congress and an inexperienced President dealing with experienced professional lobbyists on a day-to-day basis. Creating a Constitutional amendment based on an 18th century slaveowner's silly tradition is dumb. We need to get rid of it.

6. END GERRYMANDERING BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY

State legislatures have gone out of their minds with redistricting. It's mainly and most egregiously Republicans (Texas and Colorado), but Democrats are guilty as well (Maryland). New software allows criminally power-mad legislators to craft districts which are completely party-safe and completely predictable. The number of truly contested seats in this years Congressional elections will likely be in the single digits, out of 435 total. The courts have shown little interest in getting involved, so we're going to have to go back to the amendment process.

We need a Constitutional amendment which describes the districting process in objective and certain language. Only existing county or municipal boundaries should be used for district boundaries, and if a city requires more than one district, it can be divided with perfectly level, horizontal cuts. No exceptions. Fuck the power structure.

7. ESTABLISH UNIFORM VOTING PROCEDURES IN EVERY PRECINCT

Whether you live in rural Wisconsin, Philadelphia or the biggest little city in the world, if you are an American voter, you have a limited set of categories of things on which to vote. You've got President/Vice-President, you've got two houses of the U.S. Congress, you've got two houses of your state's Congress (unless you live in Nebraska, whose state Congress has just one house), you've got various state executive positions, state judges, county and municipal administration, state and local ballot initiatives and free "I Voted" stickers. No precinct is so off the wall that they couldn't use basically the same voting setup as everyone else. I have yet to see a system better than Wisconsin's, so until someone convinces me otherwise, that's what I'm going to push.

Each voter is given a ballot with disconnected arrows next to everything that can be voted for. This is simply one legal-size sheet of paper, not something that sits at an odd angle with multiple facing pages, like the idiotic butterfly ballot. Using the special marker found in each booth, you complete the arrow for each thing you want to vote for. Then you take it over to the scanning machine; if you insert a ballot with an undervote or an overvote, the ballot is rejected and spat out. In the case of an undervote, you can choose to leave it as is, abstaining from voting in that race. In the case of an overvote, you have to do it again.

This system catches mistakes before it's too late, it's easy to use and it combines electronic counting with a paper record. It is not owned by anyone who has promised to deliver his state for a particular Presidential candidate. There is absolutely no reason why it should not be implemented nationwide.

8. PROVIDE FULL PUBLIC FUNDING FOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

All right, look, as much as the first seven things are never going to happen, this one's really never going to happen. Be that as it may, it should be brought up. If we really want monied interests out of politics and government, we need to start at the top. Provide full public funding of the Presidential campaign and the costs will be more than made for in corporate favors and pork that no longer get paid for by the government. It's not going to be over and done with overnight, certainly -- money can buy ad space but not necessarily good ads, as Howard Dean can tell you, and the media simply are not going to play along -- we will eventually get someone with a backbone and no quid pro quo to deal with. When that happens and the sky doesn't fall, things will have changed.