Re: [IAC#RG] Need for Electoral Reforms -- Fundamental Deficiency

Dear Sarbajit

IAC firmly believes in representative democracy for the Republic
OK. Got it.. But whose representation? Corporate, TaxPayer or People is the root question. As I rarely read any posting here on protests happening in Kudankulam/POSCO/Jaitapur or northeast states.
When PM MMS was elected to rajyasabha no one made any comment on why a person who never won loksabha is PM for so long.?
What kind of representation? Please clear.

IAC firmly believes in minimal government except for essentials such as security, foreign affairs, law and order etc
Well this seems to be going the OUTsourcing way. The government has to outsource everything? I am sure you are well informed that we have already outsourced our defense manufacturing, training's etc to foreign nations. Foreign affairs we go by what the US has to say. Hardly we had our own say. Law n order.. I better not speak on the condition prevailing in India for that.

IAC opposes the current flawed system of "1 man 1 vote" as being undemocratic.
WOW. This is your masterstroke. First it should not be 1 man. It should have been 1 citizen. As in India both men and women have equal voting rights.
Why is this flawed and undemocratic? You have not given any explanations on this.
Seems you wish to replace the current with 1 Taxpayer 1 Vote or something on taxpayers lines.

IAC opposes proportional representation as it usually leads to minority / weak governments and unhealthy coalition politics thereby breeding all round corruption.
Since independence we have had FPTP and had all of of it.
Minority/ Weak governments, unhealthy coalitions and corruptions. Is India new to all this? Did PR have any role in it or was it FPTP that resulted in this? Actually its FPTP in India that has lead to  minority / weak governments and unhealthy coalition politics thereby breeding all round corruption which IAC opposes. WoW.

IAC believes in accountability through elections  This includes negative voting whereby a voter can exercise a negative vote AGAINST a particular candidate (especially sitting candidates/parties) on the ballot.
How many democracies practice negative voting? If Yes/No Why?
How do you assure voters will not use negative voting on caste/religious lines calling it accountability in democracy?

IAC believes that "first past the post system" is wrong.  No candidate must be declared elected who does not secure a majority of votes of the registered voters (irrespective of how many votes are actually cast) for that "constituency"
OK. IAC believes FPTP is wrong and also IAC stands against PR. Then what does IAC stand FOR? Direct democracy?
What exactly is Majority? 50%+1 or 2/3rd votes or Maximum votes?

IAC opposes all Electronic Voting Machines till they are verifiably accurate and tamper proof/evident. At today's technology level the US Army has proved it is impossible for any EV system to be uncorrupted.
EVM or ballot box. Is this a point of debate in India? Both system have flaws. History is full of news how ballot boxes were abused by Indian parliamentarians. EVM or ballot box is just a way to cast vote. In future we may have SMS based voting, Online voting, or may be raising hands in air.
And for every thing why do we look at US? Is the US so seductive that for any small big thing we have to look only to them?
As worlds largest democracy its responsibility of INDIA towards other democracies around the world, they have to learn a lot from us, and we have to be best in order to enable them learn form us.

IAC denounces all scoundrels who are mischievously propagating "49-0" type voting, as "negative voting". It is not, and 49-0 is meaningless except to mathematically benefit existing large parties.
Agree 49-O is not negative voting. Its simply I don't want to exercise my right to vote.
Its not meaningless as it was created to reduce misuse of votes. In its spirit it is right.
What exactly mathematically benefits existing larger parties is not 49-O but FPTP.

Please give a good thought to my questions and arguments. We all love India, our mother, and want it to prosper. A mother without her children not prospering wont be happy. India has lots of unheard voices in villages and so many protest are either sabotaged or crushed by government forces. People's voice has to be reflected in parliament. Quality of democracy has to improve and we all want it. 

 

Regards n Wishes

Vivek Sakpal

+91 9004308889
https://twitter.com/#!/viveksakpal

Please consider the environment before printing this email. Thank-you.



On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Pavan
>
> I thought the gist of IAC's stand on Electoral Reforms is pretty clear and
> is based on the extensive mathematical research conducted since 1920's by
> HRA (IAC's predecessor).
>
> As you know IAC's policies on electoral reforms have been constantly
> circulated, discussed and improved among our subscribers. Your email is yet
> another step in that direction.
>
> The present position is essentially:-
>
> 1) IAC firmly believes in representative democracy for the Republic.
>
> 2) IAC firmly believes in minimal government except for essentials such as
> security, foreign affairs, law and order etc.
>
> 3) IAC opposes the current flawed system of "1 man 1 vote" as being
> undemocratic.
>
> 4) IAC opposes proportional representation as it usually leads to minority /
> weak governments and unhealthy coalition politics thereby breeding all round
> corruption.
>
> 5) IAC believes in accountability through elections  This includes negative
> voting whereby a voter can exercise a negative vote AGAINST a particular
> candidate (especially sitting candidates/parties) on the ballot.
>
> 6) IAC believes that "first past the post system" is wrong.  No candidate
> must be declared elected who does not secure a majority of votes of the
> registered voters (irrespective of how many votes are actually cast) for
> that "constituency".
>
> 7) IAC opposes all Electronic Voting Machines till they are verifiably
> accurate and tamper proof/evident. At today's technology level the US Army
> has proved it is impossible for any EV system to be uncorrupted.
>
> 8) IAC believes that the present EVMs are rigged and the Election Commission
> of India is an active participant in this rigging with the CECs being the
> ringmasters in this dishonest electoral circus.
>
> 9) IAC denounces all scoundrels who are mischievously propagating "49-0"
> type voting, as "negative voting". It is not, and 49-0 is meaningless except
> to mathematically benefit existing large parties.
>
> and so on,
>
> Sarbajit
>
> National Convenor
> India Against Corruption
>
> On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:34 PM, pavan nair <pavannair1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I entirely agree with this view. I think it is high time that the IAC
>> declares its stand on electoral reforms. Pavan Nair
>>
>>
>
>
> Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
> Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
> Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
> Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
> WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in