I’m curious, what are the other electoral systems you’re talking about?

Doesn’t look like more direct.

EP parties usually have a candidate for the Commission that they show during election, so voters know who they will support. On the other hand, the European Council members are usually chosen from internal politics and issues, and at different times.

Last time a union had president, it was quickly dissolved before first term ended.

That’s just a name though. The election would stay the same, even if it were called «First Janitor».

I don’t think having one person on position like this is good for union.

The position is the same.

Why? It would give citizens a more direct way to choose the Commission.

Honestly, no idea. The only solution I can see are NGOs. Specially at EU levels, you need to show that your opinion has support, and that you aren’t just pushing your fringe idea. And on that front I believe the EU hasn’t been lacking.

I think the EP would be a lot more accountable if it was elected on single member constituencies. This also has its own issues (main one being no minority representation), but it would allow a more direct connection with their electorate and people would know who to talk to when they want to push for something.

The only big change I can see will be Parliament proposing the Commission President, instead of the European Council. Apart from that, experience shows that motions of no confidence are rare, so I don’t think this will make the Commission less independent.

would perhaps not have been feasible to realize like they have been, if the European Commission couldn’t have the best commissioners for the jobs.

Those acts are approved by Parliament, which is where the Commission will be responsible to.

The solution is not to ban lobbyist (a big part of the EU legislative process is listening to outside organizations), but to put them on equal footing to normal people.

I didn’t know US speakers refer to their states by acronyms. We don’t do that in my country.

I just said it’s common, to which you agree in your last sentence.

It’s common in Switzerland. You said it was common in all of Europe.

Education and access to communications are fundamental rights, unlike access to cash. You can live a perfectly normal life without ever touching a single coin.

Of course you can write that in the constitution, but that’s just a populist measure of which the Swiss constitution is full of.

Have you got any examples? I checked the Spanish and Portuguese ones (because I can read the original text) and the Swiss one (which seems the most likely to do that sort of thing) and they don’t mention something like that.

I support copying r/europe’s rules, maybe removing some disallowed submitions, like 1b, 1c, 4, 8b for Fediverse posts, 8c, 9 and 14 for european-related petitions. I also believe that the submission guidelines aren’t needed with the traffic level of this community.

As for the process for new moderators, here’s a post from r/europe from when they did it. Also, I volunteer to be moderator.

While I do agree that cash is very handy, that sort of thing doesn’t belong in a constitution.

Your underlying model is not made out of words, but out of concepts. You can have multiple words that all map to the same concept, i.e. cosmos, universe, space. Or a single word that map to different concepts.