[459] in libertarians
term limits, etc
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paddington Bear)
Tue Dec 6 17:07:24 1994
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 94 16:04:22 CST
From: Paddington Bear <deanjens@midway.uchicago.edu>
To: libertarians@MIT.EDU
>>1) proportional representation: if the Republicans receive 45% of the
>vote, the Dems get 45%, the Libs get 8%, and the Greens get 2%, then
>the represenative body is made up of 45% Reps, 45% Dems, etc. This
>system is used in many of the democracies of Western Europe. It
>hasn't led to a libertarian Utopia, but it is still an interesting
>system...
I dislike the idea of institutionalizing parties and eliminating
independents. If this is done where all candidates go to Washington with a
fractional amount of vote, I'm still opposed, but not strongly and based
primarily on a gut feeling. It would certainly complicate the system,
especially if you try to include term limits; would it count as .03 terms if
you only have .03 votes?
>The term limits idea is not so much about reducing the power of the
>>politicians as it is leveling it. It allows the voters to have more
>fair representation as each district's legislator is more or less of
>the same order of power as everyone else's. Yes, those who move
>up will keep their contacts and some clout, but they'll be at the
>bottom rung of any senority system.
If the problem is with the seniority system, should we just get rid of this?
I dislike much of the House and (to a lesser extent) Senate systems of rules,
and this is high on my list of things to dislike.
What purpose do term limits on the President serve? I haven't made up my
mind yet on congressional term limits, but I oppose the limits on the
President; it reduces the power of the voter to choose who is to govern
him/her, without the leveling out that vimrich refers to. (There's only one
president, unless you count Hillary :-)
-Dean Jens
