What would Congress look like if elected representatives were not alllowed to belong to any political party?

Instead of following the will of a party they would be independant to follow their own directives and the will of their constituents.

Obviously, they would have little money for campaign financing, but under my system no financing would be neccessary, as political ads would also be banned.

The media would be required by law to provide free airtime to all candidates in the form of TV interviews and debates.

Nothing else...as nothing else is required.

What would Congress look like if elected representatives were not alllowed to belong to any political party?

...Mars? I don't know. A part system is apparently Human nature, man. I don't think there's any other way, aside from Dictatorships and Monarchies.

The media would be required by law to provide free airtime to all candidates in the form of TV interviews and debates.

That...is a good idea. Unfortunately, because there is so much money available to the top candidates, there's no reason to change.

Our constitution states that political parties cannot be infringed, so it would take some doing to undo the current two-party system.

Also, the idea of allowing free airtime to all candidates sounds good on paper, but would be impractical in real life if the two-party system went away. What a station do with 20 people vying for an office? Take American Idol off the air and give them all a shot? Would never happen...

What a station do with 20 people vying for an office? Take American Idol off the air and give them all a shot?
I wouldnt complain. I remember Larry King having all the fringe candidates on his show one night years ago...made for some great commentary as they werent spouting the usual tired market-researched platitudes.

See, a representative basically has only three choices. He can vote in the house according his own sense of what is best, he can vote according to the majority will of his constituents, or he can vote according to the will of his party.

Can anyone make a case for the third option as valid and appropriate...that serves the best interests of the nation???

“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.

But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.”

―George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

See, a representative basically has only three choices. He can vote in the house according his own sense of what is best, he can vote according to the majority will of his constituents, or he can vote according to the will of his party.

Can anyone make a case for the third option as valid and appropriate...that serves the best interests of the nation???
Yea, party politics gives us a group to point our fingers at and blame when things are not going to suit us. We can also blame both political parties for failures. If majority will determined policy, we would have to blame ourselves for failures. :bawl:

Well, I know that at least radio is required to provide equal air-time for the candidates, provided that they can pay for it.

As for the party system, I think that it is inevitable for people with similar beliefs to group together and vote as one, so even if parties were banned, people would still find a way to group together.

Well, I know that at least radio is required to provide equal air-time for the candidates, provided that they can pay for it.

The forms of political campaigning that make elections so prohibitively expensive are actually the WORST forms...namely advertisments.

All campaigning should be based on media interviews and debates...not big glossy signs and 30 second TV ads.

Al Gore talks a lot about this in his excellent new book...The Assault on Reason.