[EM] By the People

[Dave Ketchum]

Having inspired Alex Small's response (see end of this post) in thread
      Re: [EM] Cheering for simplicity
      I retrieve what I wrote long ago:
URL:  http://people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek/platideas/
Section: PP Notes: III. Of the People, By the People, For the People

Something is needed to strengthen "by the people". An alternative method 
of representation is offered for thought:

     * Everyone retains present right to be a voter, but may assign that 
right to a proxy who, by soliciting the job of representing voters with 
one set of interests, accepts responsibility for using the voters' rights 
to further those interests and for keeping the voters informed. The voter 
may recall such assignment at any time. There is no limit on the number of 
voters directly served by a single proxy, but it is in each voter's 
interest to choose a proxy personally known to be responsible, with an 
appropriate platform, and willing and able to keep the voter informed. 
However, since the proxies discussed above would be too numerous to meet 
effectively for tasks such as electing or recalling a senator, proxies may 
follow the above rules in assigning their voters' rights to other proxies. 
Candidates must start at the bottom and get recommended to the next level 
by at least one proxy at each level - this is a simple formality for 
well-known politicians, but is needed as a mechanism for controlling 
introduction of newcomers.
     * Reasonable stability is needed. Recall should always be possible, 
but require a super majority such as 2/3 or 3/4 (easier to achieve via 
proxies than via individual voters). The recalled political office or 
voter rights should automatically be voted against any activity for a 
fixed period of time (the idea is for recall to always be possible, but to 
be done only to recover from serious problems).
----------------------------

On Mon, 1 Sep 2003 20:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Alex Small wrote:

> Dave Ketchum said:
> 
>>If I really wanted to broaden the field, I might get into ways for the
>>people being represented to control who got to be officials, and
>>when officials got replaced, WITHOUT doing elections.
>>
> 
> Here's a simple scheme along those lines.  Surely it can be improved, and
> as set forth it's only for legislatures, but it's a way to proceed.
> 
> Each eligible voter has one vote.  At any time he can give it to any
> representative or would-be representative that he wishes to.  As long as a
> representative has a certain threshold of support he retains his seat in
> the legislature.
> 
> Proportionality is achieved because as soon as a group gets enough people
> on board to elect one representative, it will start recruiting voters for
> another.  Groups will add representatives until they've maxed-out.


Disagreed.  Using weighted voting it is permissible for one rep to have 
several times the voting power of another.  I would require a rep to have 
some minimum voting power to have the right to take part in debate and 
actually vote (one percent would be appropriate in some bodies - perhaps 
0.1% for the House in the US Congress).

> 
> Recall is simple:  If enough voters withdraw support from one
> representative and transfer it to another the representative loses his
> office.  Maybe there could be a grace period, so that he has a certain
> interval of time to regain support before losing office.  But that's a
> detail.
> 

I think no grace period - rep better start mending fences before disaster 
strikes.

> 
> As I think of it, here's one of many possible embellishments:  Give each
> person TWO votes, which must be given to two different representatives or
> aspiring representatives.  A person may be reluctant to relinquish
> representation temporarily by transfering votes to somebody else who has
> not yet attained a quota.  People may be more willing to do so if they
> have two votes.  Or, let people make provisional transfers:  Let people
> indicate that they're willing to transfer a vote to candidate X, but only
> if enough other people are also willing to do so.
> 

I buy "TWO votes" as an idea to consider, but suspect temporary or 
provisional transfers have little positive value.  Remember that a few of 
the proxies I define could get together to combine their strength in a 
single proxy.


> Anyway, there are all sorts of ways to flesh out this framework.  I don't
> present it as a finished plan, just as a starting point.  Of course, these
> direct representation schemes have even less chance of implementation than
> the most complicated Condorcet-IRV-Approval hybrids that we might devise. 
> But they're fun to contemplate, and they may find application in private
> organizations.
> 

Make it into a usable plan and it might be salable to enough voters for 
them to demand implementation.

What I see implied above, but not stated explicitly, is that a proxy 
serving in a state legislature could serve as proxy for those backing his 
platform, even though scattered across the state.

> 
> 
> Alex

Trivia:  From the web page referenced above you can access a debate 
about DHMO - worth reading by most any debaters - and read of 
      The Marshmallow Peanut Circus and The Armory.

-- 
davek at clarityconnect.com  http://www.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.