derpy wrote:Exactly CCP, their draining the Budget and also in a Republic like America can your Head of State abolish parliament? Are they in power for life and you can't really get rid of them besides anything short of armed revolution? I guessed no, do you seethe flaws now?
Abolish? Kind of, yeah.
From the constitution:
Article III, Section III:
"He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper...."
While the Senate (which is, by its constitution, continuous) may never dissolve, the House does dissolve every two years. Therefore, technically, the President does have the power to dissolve the House of Representatives. They will, however, merely come back following election day and then the Senate will of course come back as well. Also its unclear in this clause if the President adjourning them (the original language said 'banish' explicitly) would mean they would have to stay away or if they could merely use their power to convene and set their own time to override that. Really, we've never had to deal with this issue in no small part due to precedent.
But yes, in part due to what's actually in the Constitution, and in part due to the growth of a Unitary executive in the United States, there is really little difference. I would advise you to simply go with the notion of an elective monarchy. I don't see it harming the current Queen (who seems to be the sole reason for its 60% approval rating) and if it gets rid of the embodiment of slackers known as Prince Charles I am all game.
I'm not certain what the Queen currently does; she seems to have at one point had a hand in crafting legislation under Harold Wilson, and played a key role in appointing PM's during hung parliaments. Also she seems to have used her power to stop debate to end some rather nonsense bills, though they were so inane I can't remember them at this particular moment. Nonetheless, in adverse to Victoria and her immediate successors (otherwise known as Elizabeth's grandparents and great grand parents) she doesn't seem to want to actually STOP an admittedly out of control Parliament, regardless of the fact that she might be the only Monarch we will ever see again with the public support to do so.
She seems like a person with the ability to be a leader, but she merely doesn't wish to be.