4 ms·

Right, but the point is that (currently) criticizing as a union requires unanimous approval from the member states, and some don't approve. The article propose

Right, but the point is that (currently) criticizing as a union requires unanimous approval from the member states, and some don't approve. The article proposes changing the voting scheme to a qualified-majority rather than unanimity, but personally I think it would be better to try to understand why those countries are against it and work to change that, rather than overruling them, which just reinforces the idea that the EU is a tool of a small clique of countries to rule over the others.

thefounder 8y ago
>> but personally I think it would be better to try to understand why those countries are against it and work to change that, rather than overruling them.... Think why US governors vote differently on various foreign policy issues such the Iraq/Afganistan war or the current trade war. Absolute majority is hard to achieve even in the United States.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > US governors vote differently on various foreign policy issues Not sure if this is sarcasm. American governors govern states. They have zero purview over foreign policy, which is strictly a federal matter.
  - xvf22 8y ago
    I think in this case replacing governors with senators may be appropriate and closer to the original intent.
  - Latteland 8y ago
    They have influence by using the bully pulpit, talking about it, making plans that are different. See California right now on climate change.
Brakenshire 8y ago
Some country will always take that position because there is economic and diplomatic benefit in taking it.
AnthonyMouse 8y ago
Another approach may be to use secret ballot. The issue many states have is that they don't want to be on record supporting something even though they do, for fear of retaliation etc. But if nobody knows how you voted, you can vote how you want to.
- Digit-Al 8y ago
  That works unless a vote is unanimous. At that point it is obvious what you voted.
  - emn13 8y ago
    You could choose not to publish the tally (or do you mean for votes that are required to be unanimous?), or agree beforehand not to disclose detailed-enough tallies to draw this conclusion (e.g. report only that 2 or fewer nay's were voted, but not whether that number was 0, 1, or 2.) But more practically: I kind of doubt it matters when the vote is unanimous, because at that point you're in good company, and it's going to be hard for some external entity to blame you all too much (and if they do, it's easier to find backing for your position from all those that voted like you).
    - eightysixfour 8y ago
      Votes are required to be unanimous, so a secret ballot changes nothing for the affirmative, it would only hide who voted against.
- LoSboccacc 8y ago
  that would immediately make me to switch from 'reform the eu' to 'leave the eu', there's nothing worse than a bunch of unaccountable politician twice removed from local issues voting secretly away from our control and ability to retaliate by electing someone else.
  - disgruntledphd2 8y ago
    Just to note, this would be the European Council, which is made up of national ministers, who are definitely elected. You may be thinking of the Commission, who can propose legislation and are appointed for five year terms by the Council (following nominations by national governments).
propman 8y ago
China used political capital to buy off the votes in Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Greece so those 3 countries veto any measure that China doesn’t want the EU to develop. China is smart, not naive. They can bring the EU to their knees with tens of billions of dollars making them completely ineffective due to their huge bureaucracy.

thefounder 8y ago

>> but personally I think it would be better to try to understand why those countries are against it and work to change that, rather than overruling them.... Think why US governors vote differently on various foreign policy issues such the Iraq/Afganistan war or the current trade war. Absolute majority is hard to achieve even in the United States.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> US governors vote differently on various foreign policy issues Not sure if this is sarcasm. American governors govern states. They have zero purview over foreign policy, which is strictly a federal matter.
- xvf22 8y ago
  I think in this case replacing governors with senators may be appropriate and closer to the original intent.
- Latteland 8y ago
  They have influence by using the bully pulpit, talking about it, making plans that are different. See California right now on climate change.

Brakenshire 8y ago

Some country will always take that position because there is economic and diplomatic benefit in taking it.

AnthonyMouse 8y ago

Another approach may be to use secret ballot. The issue many states have is that they don't want to be on record supporting something even though they do, for fear of retaliation etc. But if nobody knows how you voted, you can vote how you want to.

Digit-Al 8y ago
That works unless a vote is unanimous. At that point it is obvious what you voted.
- emn13 8y ago
  You could choose not to publish the tally (or do you mean for votes that are required to be unanimous?), or agree beforehand not to disclose detailed-enough tallies to draw this conclusion (e.g. report only that 2 or fewer nay's were voted, but not whether that number was 0, 1, or 2.) But more practically: I kind of doubt it matters when the vote is unanimous, because at that point you're in good company, and it's going to be hard for some external entity to blame you all too much (and if they do, it's easier to find backing for your position from all those that voted like you).
  - eightysixfour 8y ago
    Votes are required to be unanimous, so a secret ballot changes nothing for the affirmative, it would only hide who voted against.
LoSboccacc 8y ago
that would immediately make me to switch from 'reform the eu' to 'leave the eu', there's nothing worse than a bunch of unaccountable politician twice removed from local issues voting secretly away from our control and ability to retaliate by electing someone else.
- disgruntledphd2 8y ago
  Just to note, this would be the European Council, which is made up of national ministers, who are definitely elected. You may be thinking of the Commission, who can propose legislation and are appointed for five year terms by the Council (following nominations by national governments).

propman 8y ago

China used political capital to buy off the votes in Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Greece so those 3 countries veto any measure that China doesn’t want the EU to develop. China is smart, not naive. They can bring the EU to their knees with tens of billions of dollars making them completely ineffective due to their huge bureaucracy.