What if, instead of pledging allegiance to the flag, we pledged allegiance to the Constitution?
What if pharmaceutical companies were nonprofits?
How low could we drive the cost of medicine if the companies were not profit driven? I used to think that a profit motive was essential for innovation and quality. However, my experience in local government and in nonprofits has changed my perspective. I have seen first-hand that it is possible for both types of organizations to be innovative with a high commitment to customer service.
The most common response I get to this question is, “How would they pay for research and development?” It would make sense to me to sell their products on a cost-plus basis, where the “plus” is a surcharge to fund additional R&D. The costs would essentially cover exactly what it does already, minus the return for investors and owners.
What if members of the House of Representatives each represented 50,000 people instead of 760,000?
Where I currently live, I can call or email my state Representative and they’ll respond. Each Representative represents close to 50,000 people. I can see some huge benefits to increasing the number of U.S. House seats to make it more representative. The current number of 435 is apparently set by law (not the Constitution), so it would be a relatively easy process to change the law.
I was initially really skeptical of this idea, but there is a nonprofit organization that answered all of my concerns, and I’m now in favor of this approach. Check out Thirty-Thousand.org.
If you want to go straight to one of the core discussions, see: The House of Representatives is Scalable.
What if U.S. Supreme Court Justices served limited terms?
But, the way it works is different than most “fixed-term” positions. It would work something like this…
Each Justice occupies a specific seat (like Seat A, B, C, etc.). One seat comes up for replacement every two years. (We can sort out whether it’s best for that to happen in even or odd years given election cycles and how long the President has been in.)
However, if a Justice leaves their position early (through death, resignation, or whatever) then they shift to occupy the seat next up in the rotation and everyone else shifts accordingly. That way, a President will still only replace two Justices in a term even under changing circumstances. With this approach, a Justice could serve longer than 18 years if their seat keeps shifting, though the longest-serving would always be next up in the rotation.
The historic average tenure for a Supreme Court Justice is 16 years, though the actual number has been increasing in recent years. I don’t necessarily see that as a problem, but if we did decide that a limited tenure would be an improvement, this approach would give Justices an 18 year term, with an opportunity for each president to select two new Justices during their term.
What if there was a nonprofit outlet for music and other artistic works?
The nonprofit would charge like other platforms, such as Spotify, but would only keep enough to cover expenses and upgrades. Everything else would go to the artists.