Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Spiderman Quote: |
Originally Posted by 74 and counting In this sense, I would prefer the American system. Elect your Prez and then your representative......would it work here? No idea. But the system in place today is a joke.
Mike | hope u are not serious bout this mvb . cos i always believed that our democracy may teach a thing or two to others . this system has been adopted from the british form of parliament . if it works there so should it here |
Yes Gary, I am indeed serious about that. Tell me, can you answer the query I raised? About the mismatch between the local MP and the PM? I, for one, can't. As far as the British system is concerned, our situation is too too different. The illiteracy, the backwardness, the total lack of information and awareness in the hinterlands.
The moment you split the elections for the leader and the representative, first things first, the majority will be happy with the leader. It's not like the Congress alliance comes to power and suddenly decides that Laloo or Mulayam, being pivotal in their calculations will be PM. In this system, that is immensely possible......how else could a Deve Gowda have become PM??? Was he voted for that?
Also, then let's say you want Vajpayee as your PM but feel that Sunil Dutt is better for your constituency. You can have that!! Also, it will dramatically increase the work the MP will do in the constituency! He will no longer be able to rely on the fact that since you want his party to win, you will vote for him. So, everything will be issue-based, like in the US, you have several bills which are co-sponsored by 2 guys, a Democrat and a Republican! Because they think alike on that issue. Would you ever see that in India?
Think over it! I may have missed out something, but I do honestly think this system is too flawed to be successful. What's the point of an election where I don't know who will be leading the country at the end of the day?????
Cheers!
Mike