tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post4411831977727628185..comments2023-09-21T16:17:51.838+05:30Comments on Law and Other Things: In Defence of Proportional RepresentationAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09348738084817273397noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post-89689430473900459932007-04-05T14:46:00.000+05:302007-04-05T14:46:00.000+05:30Dear Mr.Soundararajan, It is good to know that our...Dear Mr.Soundararajan, <BR/>It is good to know that our CEC has also endorsed PR. I will try to get copy of his address delivered at Kumbakonam. Thanks for the useful information.V.Venkatesanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08138846925562952785noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post-75887257477078092322007-04-04T10:11:00.000+05:302007-04-04T10:11:00.000+05:30Dear Venkatesan & Arun,I do not join the debate at...Dear Venkatesan & Arun,<BR/>I do not join the debate at this stage, as I worry about the wily politician's ingenuity to corrupt all forms of democratic devices. Arun rightly joins issue with Vir Sanghvi's suggestion for a Presidential form, as the US experience sadly throws its deficits in the open. It is still moot whether George W.Bush won the election at all in the first round. I was getting a blow-by- blow account as I was, then, California then, a reasonably liberal State in USA. And, it requied a revolution, indeed, in electoral preferences, recently in the elections for the Legislatures there, as I was, then, watcihing it from Missouri, a conservative State. We certainly cannot go for it, having witnessed it in de facto under Indira Gandhi.<BR/><BR/>Let us first draw a checklist as to the ways in which public participation can improve the present system.<BR/><BR/>Incidentally, the present CEC, N. Gopalaswami spoke for the proportional representation at Kumbakonam recently.<BR/><BR/>This is not an anonymous post.<BR/>Soundararajan<BR/>User name: Innamburanஇன்னம்பூரான்https://www.blogger.com/profile/18052778553065030060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post-48006073463615962302007-03-30T11:50:00.000+05:302007-03-30T11:50:00.000+05:30Dear Mr. Venkatesan,I take your point, and hope th...Dear Mr. Venkatesan,<BR/><BR/>I take your point, and hope that I didnt' come across as someone who opposes change for its own sake. <BR/><BR/>I do think, however, that the instances you mention can be distinguished, and are not apposite analogies. EVMs and photo IDs may have required massive operationalising costs, but they are aspects of procedure, and did not require overhauling of substantive mechanisms, which involve far higher costs. And, while the Women's reservation Bill will bring about great changes, they will still be familiar ones because of the historical presence of legislative quotas for SCs/STs . As such, these do not represent the kind of paradigm shifts that moving over to the PR system will involve. <BR/><BR/>Following your suggestion, I did some basic research, and found that many countries are actively considering proposals to move over to the PR system. There does seem to be an increasing consensus about the virtues of PR over first-past-the-post systems. However, there are also appear to be documented concerns over how PR systems are not without problems (I include a link to one such article): <BR/><BR/>http://www.amconmag.com/2005_06_06/print/articleprint2.html<BR/><BR/>If indeed a national campaign is to be mounted for considering PR as an option, I would think that some preliminary steps would be in order. THe first of these should be a detailed study conducted by an institution which has both the background in Indian political systems, as well as the capacity to undertake a proper study of the suitability of PR systems for being incorporated in India. I can think of the CSDS, Delhi as being one such institution, which can perhaps work in collaboration with the Election Commission to pursue such research. <BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>ArunArun Thiruvengadamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15902119597448574508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post-82944483680093817142007-03-29T21:06:00.000+05:302007-03-29T21:06:00.000+05:30Arun, You seem to oppose PR - as far as I understa...Arun, <BR/>You seem to oppose PR - as far as I understand it - because it<BR/>A:involves substantial costs (as if the existing system where the winner takes all is cost-effective). Ans: On the face of it, it looks very simple, and much more cost-efficient than the current system. Only thing is we should display the will power to abandon the existing cost-inefficient system.<BR/>B.I am not sure whether PR would avoid the vices of money/muscle power: <BR/>Ans: True, I have not carried out a detailed analysis of PR exprience globally. One could make it, as I find some useful sites on this. Mine is definitely impressionistic, born out of superficial understanding of what PR stands for, and the roots of money and muscle power in India. If we are not ready to abandon the existing system at one go, may be we could try to combine both, and see the results as an experiment. <BR/>C: Need for training etc. mind-boggling! Similar criticisms were made when we introduced electronic voting machines, and even photo I-cards. Are these not a reality now? The question is whether the reform merits a try and whether it would be an improvement over the existing system, and whether it would enhance greatly the meaning of representation and democracy - the last question has to be answered entirely in the affirmative. I am glad Arun has not disputed this. True, simultaneously, we would require other reforms as well, like the party reform, and even the introduction of block-vote proposal which I had suggested earlier to remove the ills of anti-defection Act. <BR/>Today, we are already talking of Women's reservation bill, which could have been easily a reality, but for the opposition from male legislators. It could have vastly changed the character of our representative democracy. No complex questions that Arun poses appeared daunting to us. <BR/>The winner takes all system reduces our representation to a myth - in a multi-party contest in a constituency, it is the minority of voters whose preference gets translated as the result. Put all such results together, and we have a government and Parliament representing such a minuscule minority of voters. Is there any meaning in our discussion of the mandate etc. <BR/>Even former CEC, Dr.Gill has urged the need for a second round of election, and even a third one, so that the final result reflects the will of more than 50 per cent of the votes cast. PR will take it further, and make every vote count, and getit due value. <BR/>As I understand, PR might lead to instability, etc. as if the present system always leads to stable results. With appropriate reforms in the party system, PR can vastly improve the representative and democratic content of our Republic.V.Venkatesanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08138846925562952785noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post-46638260792132779002007-03-26T20:56:00.000+05:302007-03-26T20:56:00.000+05:30Dear Mr. Venkatesan,I have to say that I don't hav...Dear Mr. Venkatesan,<BR/><BR/>I have to say that I don't have much sympathy for this suggestion. Particularly because, I see that Vir Sanghvi at one point suggests that we in India should adopt a US style presidential system. This, when the effects of the fundamental crisis in the US electoral system which Bush v. Gore exposed are still fresh in our minds. In the aftermath of that episode, some U.S. constitutional scholars suggested that new countries should look away from the U.S. model, and focus instead on British parliamentary systems for their perceived superiority in achieving good governance. Arguably, one can separate out the U.S. presidential system from the process that Americans use to elect their President, but that will still mean adopting an entirely new system, a process which has substantial costs. <BR/><BR/>I tend to a bit skeptical towards suggestions for 'reform' which consist of advocating that the status quo be wholly abandoned, and <BR/>some other system existing in another part of the world, which looks very good on paper, be adopted instead. I haven't conducted a study of Proportional Representation in Europe, but given that Europeans don't seem entirely happy with how PR works in individual nations within Europe, I am sure there are downsides to that as well. Is there any evidence to show that the PR system is able to avoid the vices of 'money power' and 'muscle power' completely? <BR/><BR/>In the 80s, there were many people who suggested that the way out for India was to adopt a US style presidential system. That, incidentally, appears to be how many people in the Philippines also think today, as they try and come up with ways of fixing what they perceive to be ills with their democratic polity today. <BR/><BR/>While I am all for innovative solutions to our democratic system, I am not sure that path lies in adopting an entirely new system from somewhere else. There are huge costs to giving up a system that has been in place for more than 60 years, and replacing it with something entirely new. To mention but one aspect, this will require training a whole lot of individuals : the political players, the referees, the electorate - a massive operation in itself. <BR/><BR/>I am not sure the problems with our democratic system that Vir Singhvi documents are attributable to the first-past-the-post system alone. I think these problems are more fundamental, and I am not sure that merely swapping one system of elections for another will fix it. <BR/>The issues that bedevil our polity - lack of a democratic spirit within major political parties, corruption, criminalisation, nepotism, a tendency to play the politics of vote-banks, etc. - won't simply go away by adopting a different system. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/><BR/>ArunArun Thiruvengadamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15902119597448574508noreply@blogger.com