Home

Civil Liberty

Coalitions

Debate

Electoral Reform

Europe

Impeachment

Media

Parliament

Party Funding

Petition

Politicians

Referendum

Swiss Model

Taxation

What others say
 

Electoral Reform

Election reforms
are usually instigated at the behest of politicians who do not like to listen to the voters and try to manipulate the results of upcoming elections.
In Austria the two major parties want to re-inforce their dominance by extending the legislative period from four to five years, in Turkey the largest party wants to push through its Presidential candidate by changing to  a system where the President is elected directly instead of by the Parliament and in Italy the discussion about the electoral system is threatening to become the equivalent of a political soap opera.
Sometimes these efforts backfire as in the case of the recent Scottish parliamentary elections. Without reference to the wishes of the ordinary citizens a complicated new election system was introduced that led to almost 142,000 ballot papers becoming declared invalid - 10 times the number spoilt when these elections were last held in 2003.
11-May-07

Narrow Election Victories
All too often elections now lead to very narrow majorities in favour of the winning side. This is the natural outcome of the necessity to cater to the voters in the centre of the political spectrum who are needed to swing the pendulum one way or the other. Policies are fine-tuned to the point very differences between the two competing camps are smal enough to attract enough voters to cross the line dividing the opposing camps but at the same time not upsetting the natural constituents of each party. The only major remaining difference are the personalities of the two opposing sides.
06-May-07

Plus ca change
The more things change, the more they stay the same one could say when surveying the results of recent elections or contemplates the alternatives that are on offer to the Public in upcoming elections.
Does it really matter who has won the French Presidential election, the recent Italian, German or Austrian elections or who will be the next President of Turkey, Russia or the USA?
One thing is noticeable in all the election campaigns: the candidates make a litany of election promises that are often incompatible and nearly always have not been costed properly or will have to be supported by more state borrowing or higher taxes that are not mentioned in the election programs.
One box-ticking exercise every few years will do nothing to solve the real problems and concerns of the majority of citizens and at best satisfy selected vociferous lobbies and minorities whose votes are needed to swing the usually narrow vote one way or another.
The campaign more and more often depends of the personalities of the leading candidates and the voters are goaded into expecting messianic miracles from backing one or the other candidate. No wonder that sooner or later most of the successful candidates start to believe their own propaganda and become more and more dictatorial and remote from the realities faced by ordinary citizens.
The election promises usually are not worth the paper they are written on as soon as the election results are in.
All these problems - excessive dependence on personalities, useless election promises, too much importance given to marginal issues and lobbies would be contained if the electorate would have a say in the decision of all policy issues. As referenda would be held specifically to decide single issues the debate would become much more objective and rational.
04-May-07

16-year olds may get right to vote
A number of politicians in Austria recently become more vocal in demanding the right of 16-year olds to vote.
We think that this is meaningless populism as long as the voting experience is limited to a box-ticking exercise that is held once every four years.
6-Mar-07

Polarisation - Direct consequence of box-ticking democracy
In many countries elections leave a clear division between two main political grouping, usually called left and right.
Elections often lead to very close results and changes in government are precipitated by a small swing in the relative share of the popular vote gained by the respective parties.
A system of direct democracy compensates for the tendency towards the development of two dominant parties - or groups of parties - that take turns in power. As every major decision would have to be approved by the electorate the influence of the established political party machines would be reduced and balanced.
6-Mar-07

Minister imposes three-line whip
Today's news that Labour MPs will be under a three-line whip to support the Government's all--or-nothing strategy for a super casino in Manchester demonstrates how urgent the introduction of direct democracy has become. The present system of parliamentary 'democracy' has degenerated into an elective dictatorship that makes a mockery of the separation of powers.
Giving the voters the last word in any decision will be an essential safeguard against the abuse of powers by any party that holds a majority in Parliament. At the same time we should not forget to reform the present political system that links the formation of government to a majority in parliament (which should supervise and control government not just be herded into cowardly submission).
02-Mar-07

French Establishment uses dirty tricks
to keep out upstart parties like the Front National. The rule requiring the support of at least 500 mayors before anyone can stand as a candidate in the Presidential elections is tailor-made to make it very difficult for any candidate to challenge the established parties who obviously will be the parties of the pre-dominant number of mayors in office at any one time. While we in no way support the Front National this capricious regulation is just one more example how outmoded - even corrupt - the political systems have become in most countries.
02-Mar-07


Electoral Law - Does it matter?
The recent political mini-crises in Italy led politicians and commentators to argue that (another) change in the electoral law would be the solution to Italy's problems. We would argue that the introduction of full direct democracy would - after a period of transition - lead to a more stable political culture under any form of electoral law. As the parties would be aware that - whatever they agree or don't agree on - the citizens would have the final say on any policy, they would tend to converge on views that are likely to be supported by the majority in any referendum.
1-Mar-07

Prodi steps down over defeat on foreign policy issues
In a system of direct democracy there would be no need for a minister to resign over issues that were at the heart of the vote in Italy's senate that caused Romani Prodi to offer his resignation.
Issues such as the stationing of Italian troops in Afghanistan or the enlargement (or continued existence) of an American military base near Vicenza would ultimately be voted upon by the electorate and would therefore be not so much a party-political issue.
22-Feb-07


Big Money wins New Jersey, New York
We leave it to the reader to form his own opinion about rich individuals outspending their rivals in the election campaigns that just ended.
More direct democracy and mandatory referenda would curtail the power of the politicians and make it less relevant how they gain their seats. The citizens would have the final say on any important decision.
Developing this argument, we could also predict that countless regulations relating to the funding of political parties would also become superfluous.
09-Nov-05

Is politics a one-way street?
One should think so given the fact that every year the number of laws and regulations seems to move only one way, up!
Even the instrument of the referendum seems to be useless to stem this tidal wave of regulation. To the contrary, while it happens quite often that a new referendum is started after a proposal has been rejected in a referendum, the opposite practically never happens.
Are people just too lethargic to launch referenda that are intended to abolish laws and regulations? Are they too conditioned to accept the status quo and to direct their energies towards restricting their freedoms with an ever-increasing web of laws and regulations?
26-Sept-05

When is a referendum representative?
Quite often the outcome of a referendum is decided by a narrow margin. But can one really say, that a majority of 1 or even 3 percentage points is a sufficient mandate for change? And change it always is because otherwise there would not have been the need to hold a referendum. I think that certainly the more important decisions should only be approved with a two-thirds majority. In addition, at least 50 percent of those entitled to vote should have cast their vote.
26-Sept-05

The Cult of the Personality
Elections degenerate more and more to a beauty contest between the top candidates of the competing parties. The contest between Merkel and Schroeder in Germany is the most recent example.
But should it really matter whether this or that candidate has a stronger 'instinct for power' or can project his private live more successfully?
In a political system where the voters would have the opportunity to directly decide the outcome of the debate of individual issues the features of the main political actors would become of secondary importance.
24-Sept-05

But the citizen cannot be involved in the technical details of legislation!
This is one of the favourite arguments that the opponents of direct democracy have at their disposal. Even people who in principle like the idea of closer citizen involvement seem to be puzzled by the question how direct democracy could work in practice.
The solution to this 'conundrum' is quite simple. Most laws would still be proposed and agreed in the traditional fashion, that is by the elected representatives in Parliament, regional bodies or town halls. But all legislation of major importance would have to be subject to a mandatory referendum. All other legislation would still be subject to a facultative referendum that would have to be launched by the citizens that want to object. They would then have to find sufficient support before a referendum on the issue would have to be held. The number of supporters would have to be large enough to demonstrate that a referendum has real support but not too large so as to make it impossible to launch a referendum. A number between 5 and 10% or registered voters may be just about right.
The result of such a system would be that the government would avoid introducing legislation that has very little hope finding majority approval. This in turn would reduce the number of issues that would require the holding of a referenda.
23-Sept-05

Two kinds of referendum

We propose the introduction of mandatory confirmation of all major legislation and expenditure by the holding of referenda (on a national, regional and local level)

We propose the introduction of facultative referenda on other legislation if a certain number of voters can be mobilised (subject to a quorum)

We propose the introduction of direct election of Senior Government Officials

In order to reduce reliance on the whims of certain individuals the number of these positions should be held to an absolute minimum. We do not think that a political entity should be dominated by one individual, be it's name Mitterand, Thatcher, Kohl, Chirac or Berlusconi. Whatever their personal and political merit may be (or have been) it is easy to find as many mistakes as successes. As in the case of the Roman Republic or Switzerland in more recent times an exception will be made in case of war.

Narrow Election Results
Elections often result in a very narrow victory for the winning side. The last two Presidential Elections in the USA immediately spring to mind. The recent Mexican standoff or the Italian elections also produced extremely narrow outcomes.
The development of countries over a period of many years should not depend on such an exercise that makes a mockery of proper democracy.
A tiny majority of citizens should not be allowed to rule over a bloc of citizens that is of nearly the same size.
The introduction of Direct Democracy would make it possible to hold votes on all major policies before they are implemented. By requiring a quorum on a numeric and geographical basis an elective dictatorship of a small majority can be avoided.
Some election systems can result in governments that are only enjoying the support of a minority of the electorate. Holding votes on all major policy issues would place severe constraints on governments that are not backed by a majority of the popular vote.