Major countries with this status include Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. These have been completely independent of the United Kingdom for most of the 20th century if not longer, the Monarch as it were wearing different hats when functioning as Queen of the UK or, very rarely, as Queen of Canada, Queen of Australia, or Queen of New Zealand, or of her dozen other independent realms (many in North America).
In each case outside the UK the Queen�s responsibilities are carried out at the national level by a Governor-General, nowadays a citizen of the particular realm nominated for the post by its elected government, and appointed by the Queen on that advice, independently of Her Majesty�s British Government. In addition, in her federal realms of Canada and Australia, the Queen is represented independently at the provincial or state level by an officeholder analogous to the Governor-General, titled Lieutenant-Governor or Governor, respectively.
The most important reason for settling on this form of Monarchy for the United States is that it represents an established system, obviating the need to reinvent Monarchy here. Also, it already includes a specific incumbent, Elizabeth II, and one with a lifetime of experience serving a global power, the UK, a diverse country with a legal, political, and cultural heritage similar in many ways to our own. Her successors will share in this experience. And Her Majesty and the Royal Family are well known to, and loved by, many in this country.
In adopting the Commonwealth Monarchy, the United States would be free to adopt (or retain or amend) a Constitution as it sees fit; we would not be constrained, for instance, to use the title �Governor-General,� if we believe it sounds too �colonial.� It should also be emphasized that although Britain lacks a single written constitution (ie, its constitution is not "codified"), all the other Commonwealth Realms have them. In fact, Australia�s was composed under the influence of ours, incorporating elements such as state sovereignty and delegated federal powers.
There would also be no need to change our national flag or anthem.
Outside the UK, none of Her Majesty�s Realms as such has a House of Lords or other hereditary nobility; in fact Britain�s House of Lords is being modified in a more democratic direction. Australia and Canada each has a Senate for a national upper house, and the other Realms have unicameral legislatures.
All it consists of is naming Elizabeth II independent Queen of the United States of America, just as she is independent Queen of the UK, independent Queen of Canada, independent Queen of Australia, independent Queen of Jamaica, etc.
This proposal may be considered independently of the Monarchy Party�s other related constitutional and legal proposals, but it fits-in with them all as part of a constitutional system we believe will be better for all Americans.
Other arrangements could be envisioned or invented, but this is the proposal of the Monarchy Party of the United States.
Tiernan O Faolain, Feb. 23, 2005