A new way to elect our presidents

The presidential caucuses and primaries that start in January the year before the general elections lasting about 17 months is definitely too long.

The candidates portray each other with a lot of statements that the viewer most likely has no way of knowing if it is true or false, especially if it's an out of state candidate.

The one with most financial backup usually wins to become the presidential nominee, so money talks and B.S. walks.

Is this good for the country? Well, you look back a few years and you be the judge.

Here is an idea: Have the Congress (House) and the Senate elect the president and vice president for one term at a time.

A candidate must have been a senator for at least two terms or a congressman for no less than 10 years.

Result? Consistency in government, and their choices (election) would be much safer and better known to all 535 members than to millions of voters.

Recounts would not be needed. Majority of votes would win.

Advantages:

1) The candidate would be working in Washington D.C. or the state he or she represented instead of campaigning and wasting our time and money.

2) No need to send letters asking for political donations.

3) Candidates elected would be in charge from day one (no training period needed).

4) No questionable candidate would ever run this country as has been the case in 1972, 1992 and 2000/2004.

5) Voters would not waste their time watching boring primaries or debates and do much better devoting the time with their children or friends and other more productive things.

Disadvantages:

1) Change in the constitution.

2) Maybe more than two political parties. OK with me.

3) Politician would have to work harder. OK with me.

William T. Schmocker

Des Plaines