Of course, the atmosphere is different, because the House of Commons is purposely constructed so that there isn't room for all the members to sit down at one time and so that the two sets of benches face each other rather than the speaker. In these more crowded and confrontational conditions, which would not apply in the comparatively decorous surroundings of the Capitol...

From a purely practical perspective, how would this work? In the House of Commons, the opposing parties literally sit only a few feet apart. Indeed, the physical configuration of the House of Commons has been compared to a football pitch, which of course speaks to the proposed usage of said chamber. What would members of Congress do, shout their questions at the president? Or perhaps we'd have someone running around with a mic a la Oprah Winfrey.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see any president receive the what-for during a "president's question time." As with all trial balloons floated by the candidates, though, a little more detail about how it would actually work would be welcome.

I think another important decision would be putting it before the Senate instead of the House. There are loads of yahoos in the Senate, but there are far more in the House. If you did it in front of the House it'd just be scads of small time first-termers reading lame questions into the record. The Senate is smaller, as well, making for a more intimate setting.

The one thing that the Senate, or House, could offer that would be superior to the House of Commons, is the audience. Unlike the House of Commons, there is gallery seating in both U.S. houses of Congress. The Tories can boo and heckle fine... but if you encouraged audience involvement in the U.S., our two buildings suddenly look like Roman coliseums with their lofted seating.

You'd just have to keep Code Pink out of there...

Who says it has to held at the capital?

There are literally dozens of meeting halls, convention centers and other locations in and around DC where such an event could be held. Many would be more conductive to a question and answer format than than either chamber of congress.

The only reason to hold it at the capital is some misguided sense of 'tradition' or the ego of the members.

America has a long tradition of using microphones and video cameras. The logistics aren't really that much of a problem.