- Why not keep the present system of checks and balances? The Senate's current role in legislation prevents many improvident laws from passing.
- The proposal to grant the Senate the power to approve or disapprove the commitment of military forces abroad wreaks havoc with the doctrine that the whole Congress ought to have the power to declare war, and therefore gives unprecedented power to the President.
- Why even have a suspensatory veto?
Second, the suspensatory veto could prevent improvident legislation from passing, especially if the period of suspension takes any legislation close to an election cycle. The members of the House would, in theory, have the opportunity to hear from their constituents before any bill would pass. While not perfect, this plan would work to avoid the (alleged) practice of Congress passing legislation in non-election years that would make them vulnerable during election years.
- Would the "veto" over executive orders be cumbersome?
- The provision about curbing the power of the Vice President doesn't make sense.
Update 10-27-09: I have clarified some of the language and added material.