[EM] non-binding direct democracy system

[Markus Schulze]

Hallo,

James Green-Armytage wrote (26 March 2004):
>   The most obvious source for generating options on multiple option ballots
> is the congress, for example saying that any option should be put on the
> ballot if it can gain the support of at least 1/10th or 1/5 of the members
> of either house, or whatever.

When already 1/10th or 1/5th of the members of either house could put an
alternative on the ballot, then the incentive to agree to a compromise
option would rather decrease.

James Green-Armytage wrote (26 March 2004):
>    Another possibility which I find somewhat interesting would be to create
> a sort of shadow government using the DD system. That is, once every year
> or two, you could have a popular vote, probably based on Meek STV or
> CPO-STV (with no district boundaries), to select a certain number of
> individuals (I don't know how many). For yucks I will call them Shadow
> Ministers, which is in my opinion the coolest title for any real political
> office. A shadow minister would be authorized to sponsor alternative
> options to be put onto DD ballots. Perhaps they would be given a certain
> number of sponsorships per year which they could not exceed. Also, they
> might be able to generate one or two separate issues per year as well.
> They would be paid a modest amount which would allow them to keep their
> own time available for the job and hire a small office staff. They would
> not need to generate all the ideas themselves. Instead, people from across
> the land would contact them with suggestions, and they would sponsor the
> suggestions if they believed them to have merit.
>    So far I like the shadow minister idea. It fits along with my general
> notion that since the legal government is too power-bound and deeply set
> in its ways to change sufficiently and with sufficient speed, an
> alternative process based on more effectively democratic principles should
> be created to supplement the elements which it lacks. Exactly how
> threatening mainstream politicians would find this notion, I'm not sure. I
> suppose it depends on just how sinister you actually think they are. It
> seems to me that they might find the shadow minister suggestion a bit more
> threatening than the rest of it, since it clearly implies that the
> congress isn't able to do what it's supposed to do, that is listening to
> the voice of the people and transforming their more meritorious ideas into
> law.

In the long run this simply means the introduction of a third chamber.

Markus Schulze