Wed 1 Nov 2006
That is what we’ll call them. They will be united and independent. I am talking about a new political party people. An idea of a generation. A political movement that will change the Canadian Political Landscape forever. The United Independent Party.
Think of it. The perfect synthesis of modern communications technology and the representative political system. The right time and the right place. In each of our 308 ridings, a candidate runs on a simple yet powerful platform: to vote the preferences of thier constituents. The party determines the riding candidates on a basis of background pre-qualifying and riding preference. The party determines a code of conduct and publishes and presents the foundation document of the party, the Social Contract.
The Social Contract is a document that outlines what constituents can expect from their representative and how the system works. Each UI MP agrees as a condition of their membership to vote in the House of Commons as their constituents direct them. The constituent’s line is the party line. The role of the MP is to deliver the opinion of their constituents in Ottawa and maintain a constituency office that both informs the electorate and survey riding opinions. In practice, it works like this:
As a vote nears in the House of Commons the constituency office educates the riding on the issues at hand. The information is presented in an unbiased way and opinion pieces are presented from the various stakeholders. The office collects the opinions of the voters in the constituents based on the voters list and standard statistical principles or reliability. The MP then votes the will of the constituents in the house. If the opinion of the riding is not determinable through statistical significance or is against the charter of rights and freedoms, the MP will either abstain from the vote (or vote their personal preference I have not decided).
Thus the will of the people is realized in the legislative home of our nation. Well, I’ll think about it some more.
To quote Edmund Burke:
“Your representative owes you not only his industry but his judgment. He betrays rather than serving you if he sacrifices his judgment to your opinion.”
One of the finest benefits of the admittedly imperfect system we call representative democracy is that, at its best, it allows us to select people who are smarter than us to create innovative solutions that we might not have thought of. We pay them to educate themselves about policy problems with all the time and energy at their disposal, not merely so that they can mirror our opinions, but so that they can develop expert opinions of their own.
This new system seems to me to be good old-fashioned direct democracy, but with an additional layer of representation in between that might not add much. We still end up with the key problems of direct democracy, namely “How do we make all the people devote 16 hours a day to participating in politics” and “Do we really want Joe Schmo to decide our positions on medical research, greenhouse gases, and war policy - if he’s not an expert in any of these fields himself?”
OK, I’ll stop babbling and save any more rhetorical ammunition for future rounds in this debate.
I think what Paul thinks too… but less developed and more biological.
Particularly when it comes to delicate matters that are contentious, such as assisted suicide or gay marriage or when life is really alive, I think it pays to have people with some expertise behind the votes.
I like your system, Will, but the one main weakness I see is what epidemiologists call the “patient bias.” It’s the sickest/loudest/most opinionated that get their voices heard, not necessarily the majority - and even if they are strong in numbers, there are many issues about which the majority doesn’t know enough to vote on in an educated fashion.
For example - Stem cell research.
Enter Rush Limbaugh.
I have considered the viewpoints you express. We currently do not elect MPS that can boast any particular aptitude in any policy area. At best we vote for MPS for their affiliation to a party leader we think represents our views or have a good bunch of advisors.
This United Independents is essentially a work-around. The current system is build for representitive democracy but the views of the people are never expressed. What you may like on social policy in one party, may be balanced against a foreign policy you hold as repugnant.
Each riding office could publish the running poll status on an issue. Those registered to vote in the riding would all have a chance to vote and I believe many would if the process was made easy nad multiple voting platforms were made available (internet, mail, phone, in person). The goal is not “perfect government policy” the goal is accuratly representing the views of the constituents.
I hope I can make a post out of these comments alone. Keep em coming!