The members of the House of Commons run for election primarily as representatives of, and with the effective permission of, their respective parties. The campaigns are short and, compared to American standards, rarely very personal. Party discipline is effective, and it generally reigns in and systematically discourages mavericks and "characters" of the sort who all too often run for office in the States.

In America, even Congressmen, and especially Senators, run as regional princes. Their names and faces, their personalities and histories, are precious to them and to their reelection possibilities. And there is no force in the universe, either natural or supernatural, that can dissuade them from using TV time to promote their reelection.

Anyone who's watched even a very high-profile, time-circumscribed Congressional hearing -- for example, the Senate confirmation hearings of Chief Justice Roberts, or the recent House and Senate hearings in which Gen. Petraeus and Amb. Crocker testified -- knows beyond any doubt that the Congress-critters can't seem to do anything but make speeches (most of them very bad). They couldn't manage to ask a crisp, precise question to save their lives.

This is equally true of Republicans and Democrats.

I'm quite certain that there are public officials in America whose skills match up to British PMs. (Chief Justice Roberts showed himself easily as skilled as Tony Blair on his best day at picking his way through complicated policy minefields, and in playing jujitso to tumble his most determined opponents' best-crafted "gotchas.") What's lacking in America is on the side of the potential questioners.

He's also perfectly capable of offering a completely open debate with either Obama or Clinton, where they can ask each other questions and expect answers.

I'm guessing he won't be so open to it now, or in the event he gets voted into the White House.

Whether on the floor of the house or senate, or at some neutral place, it might be quite effective in opening up communications.

I think it would be interesting to see what would happen if McCain offered this possiblity and some Senators and Representatives took him up on it.

There are a lot of other differences between the British system and ours that might be significant in instituting a Question Time. A far smaller proportion of MP's are solicitors or barristers than are lawyers in our Congress. Commons is vastly more representative than our House. And the average age of Commons is younger.

It would only end up much the same as the drab and meaningless congressional hearings that increasingly take place on c-span. The president would wind up on the same field as Roger Clemens , just some fallen celebrity to wag fingers at.