[EM] Why bicameralism ?

[Dr.Ernie Prabhakar]

Congratulations, on the Ph.D., Stephane!

On Sep 1, 2004, at 9:01 AM, Brian Olson wrote:
> On Sep 1, 2004, at 6:18 AM, Stephane Rouillon wrote:
>> Stop internal behind-the-scene
>> deals and start an open and neutral decisional process that would 
>> encourage
>> politicians to take decisions that benefit the most to get reelected.
>
> You're going to have to justify that more. I'm not sure why one system 
> or another minimizes "behind-the-scene deals". As far as I can tell, 
> the best fix is a responsive participatory democracy where people at 
> whatever level (voter, representative) are paying some attention to 
> what goes on in the parts they have a vote over and they vote the bums 
> out as needed.

I'm with Brian on this.   I agree (I think) that geographic 
representatives often engage in pork barrel politics of various kinds, 
but that's just a perverse reflection of the valid fact that they *are* 
responsible for looking out for the interests of their region -- not 
just the people who voted for them.   I think there are better ways to 
avoid back-room dealing than eliminating geographic districts.  And 
there are some advantages.  I ran across this lovely quote by Sir 
Walter Scott:

http://www.rampantscotland.com/quotations/blquotesf.htm
"I dinna ken muckle about the law," answered Mrs Howden; "but I ken, 
when we had a king, and a chancellor, and parliament-men o' our ain, we 
could aye peeble them wi' stanes when they werena gude bairns - Bit 
naebody's nails can reach the length o' Lunnon."

 From "The Heart of Midlothian" by Sir Walter Scott, in 1818.

I think PR and geographic representation both have different structural 
flaws and advantages.   Bicameralism is a one way to play those 
weaknesses against each other, encouraging more robust legislation.  
Having two mechanisms with different systematic errors is the best way 
to improve accuracy.

Cheers,
- Ernie P.
(my Ph.D. is in physics, so electoral theory is still fun :-)