- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
I believe the Internet has the potential to return us to direct democracy.
If every bill were published on line along with all the information for and against it, would it not be a relatively simple thing to enable individual citizens to cast their votes for or against any legislation?
I know not everybody has a computer or Internet access but for those people access could be made available at the post office or a similar government office.
I know that some (most?) people would not be terribly interested in most of the goings on in government and would not bother to vote, but no-one would be forced to vote and the opportunity to vote on issues that ARE important to you would be worth it.
My idea for the process of voting would look like this:
I sign in and log on to a government website and find the topic du jour...
Lets say that the issue is capital punishment...
The issue is posted on the web a week or more in advance of the vote for all to read. This also counts on the usual suspects in our political plural system (interest groups, media, social leaders, trade unions, religious figures) to get the information out
A window of opportunity is given to vote for the issue (couple of Days?)... I vote for it
Now lets say that less than 50% of the constituents in my riding vote online. That leaves the deciding vote in the hands of my elected MP. If on the other hand more than 50% of constituents vote then the MP's vote is the same as any constituents, a single vote. Either way the votes of all from my riding only count for one vote in the HoC
From there the normal rules apply in the HoC Carried or not.
Think it would work?
It seems to me that this idea offers a significant improvement on individual choice and liberty. It also means that if the government is out to lunch on a confidence issue the people would have the power to vote non-confidence. Can you say accountability?
Now I know, who is going to vote for tax increases? Well this system would also demand a more educated, active and rational approach to politics and government from all the citizens of the country as well. Not a bad thing IMO.
Seriously though, do you think that unless a ridiculous piece of legislation was being put to a vote that the majority would bother to vote?
I believe this could be done with current technology, the real question is should it be done, do we want it to be done?
Personally I say yes. Democracy should be characterized by an orgy of choice, not an absence of it.
If every bill were published on line along with all the information for and against it, would it not be a relatively simple thing to enable individual citizens to cast their votes for or against any legislation?
I know not everybody has a computer or Internet access but for those people access could be made available at the post office or a similar government office.
I know that some (most?) people would not be terribly interested in most of the goings on in government and would not bother to vote, but no-one would be forced to vote and the opportunity to vote on issues that ARE important to you would be worth it.
My idea for the process of voting would look like this:
I sign in and log on to a government website and find the topic du jour...
Lets say that the issue is capital punishment...
The issue is posted on the web a week or more in advance of the vote for all to read. This also counts on the usual suspects in our political plural system (interest groups, media, social leaders, trade unions, religious figures) to get the information out
A window of opportunity is given to vote for the issue (couple of Days?)... I vote for it
Now lets say that less than 50% of the constituents in my riding vote online. That leaves the deciding vote in the hands of my elected MP. If on the other hand more than 50% of constituents vote then the MP's vote is the same as any constituents, a single vote. Either way the votes of all from my riding only count for one vote in the HoC
From there the normal rules apply in the HoC Carried or not.
Think it would work?
It seems to me that this idea offers a significant improvement on individual choice and liberty. It also means that if the government is out to lunch on a confidence issue the people would have the power to vote non-confidence. Can you say accountability?
Now I know, who is going to vote for tax increases? Well this system would also demand a more educated, active and rational approach to politics and government from all the citizens of the country as well. Not a bad thing IMO.
Seriously though, do you think that unless a ridiculous piece of legislation was being put to a vote that the majority would bother to vote?
I believe this could be done with current technology, the real question is should it be done, do we want it to be done?
Personally I say yes. Democracy should be characterized by an orgy of choice, not an absence of it.