We should hold a national election for speaker of the house. The election will select from the currently elected representatives. This will take the corruption out of the speakership position because the people will decide. There is no need for internal politics to build a majority of representatives. Rather, the majority of voters will decide.
If the people are dissatisfied with the behavior or results of the speaker. The voters can call for another speaker election. They do this by holding an online poll that is implemented using blockchain technology that is fully audited and inspected by anyone. The blockchain records are cryptographically integrity protected. The blockchain systems are constructed from open source software that runs on secure execution environments.
The house can select candidates who are not members of the house according to current house rules. But these choices are ratified by the election process.
The party that has control determines which party the voters are from. This ensures the minority party can’t usurp control of the speakership.
So basically California wins every time?
This assumes that only citizens can vote.
Ideally the speaker would be considerate of both the majority and minority. Explicitly excluding the minority from having a say would only serve to cause further division
The overall objective is to have a speaker that is a-political. The speaker should facilitate discussion among the various representatives. If the speaker is also a representative for a district, they have divided loyalties. If the speaker is voted in by national election it could be anyone, except someone who already holds public office. The duties of speaker should be limited and directly pertain to facilitation of debate. The rules should be adopted by national election and not modifiable by congress.
How does excluding voters who aren’t affiliated with the majority party select for an apolitical speaker? Wouldn’t an apolitical speaker be someone who is generally acceptable, even across party lines?
Reading this and trying to understand it, this proposal mostly reads like it comes from either a failure to understand how the government is intended to work or wishful thinking built on a desire to rewrite the constitution without actually amending it.