4 ms·

I think your comment gives the misleading impression Von der Leyen was not elected at all. So for readers who may not know the system: Von der Leyen's appoint

I think your comment gives the misleading impression Von der Leyen was not elected at all. So for readers who may not know the system: Von der Leyen's appointment, and the EU Commission, were both subject to approval votes by MEPs of the EU Parliament, who are elected by EU citizens in all member countries using proportional representation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_der_Leyen_Commission#Election_and_formation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_der_Leyen_Commission#Elect... > On 16 July 2019, European Parliament took a vote on the proposal by the European Council and elected Von der Leyen with 383 votes (374 votes needed). > The Commission was approved by European Parliament on 27 November 2019, receiving 461 votes, with 157 against and 89 abstentions.

turbinerneiter 6y ago
She was not elected by the voters. The voters were told that the winning party's candidate would be the commission president. Now von der Leyen is. She did not run in the election. This is a lot more similar to the electoral college making the losing candidate president than people want to admit. We elected the parliament under the impression that the MEPs would then elect the candidate of the party that got the most votes. Then, they didn't. The EU is not very democratic and if we don't fix that, we will lose it. And that is the last thing I want. I want the EU to succeed.
- zajio1am 6y ago
  > She was not elected by the voters. The voters were told that the winning party's candidate would be the commission president. Now von der Leyen is. She did not run in the election. Well, this is true for prime minister posts in most parliamentary democracies. The winner is not the leader of plurality-winning party, but one who can get majority support in parliament. Usually it is the same person, but EP is too disintegrated for that (many small parties with only token loyality to party blocs), so plurality winner failed to get majority support. Had MEPs forged majority coalition, they would have rejected EC offer and have forced their commission president.
  - jariel 6y ago
    This argument doesn't work very well because even in Parliamentary systems there is good clarity as to what people are voting for. Your arguments is resting on technicalities, but not on the realities of awareness and participation of voters. Boris Johnson had a questionable first phase as PM due to his inherited position, a lack of confidence - so - there was an election. Not only did everyone in the UK know who they were voting for in terms of individual leadership, but very much in terms of policy. It was also an 'issue election'. The affirmation of 'Boris to complete Brexit' was clear, democratic and decisive (however people may disagree with the result). Voters clearly 'had their say'. The EU does not have any such relevance in terms of issues, ideology, leadership, policy, participation, regulatory clarity, which makes it's democratic credentials kind of questionable. They do some good work though, it's just going to be a problem when the are at odds with the people. Edit: I should add, the fact there was no public awareness at all of Von der Leyen - there was no opportunity for scrutiny, press inquisition, background awareness - is obviously problematic from a democratic perspective.
    - zajio1am 6y ago
      UK is bit of special case, as although it has parliamentary system, because of single-member districts it gravitates to two-party situation with clear winners. That is rarely case in other countries, where PM often depends on fragile coalition formed after election.
      - jariel 6y ago
        Canada has a stable 3-party (+1, Greens) Parliamentary system. But either way - even in more proportional systems, people know what they are voting for. In the EU, they generally do not.
    - turbinerneiter 6y ago
      Exactly, von der Leyen could never have won a fair election, because she was involved in a scandal around illegal contracts for consultants - in any proper election, someone with a recent scandal like, particularly revolving around spending public money I'm a wrong way, would be toxic and no party would even run them as their candidate.
- pyrale 6y ago
  > This is a lot more similar to the electoral college making the losing candidate president than people want to admit. Not really comparable, as Von der Leyen and Weber, the denied spitzenkandidat were from the same party. The fact is that the spitzenkandidat system is not an official rule, it's just an informal agreement that the previous legislature managed to strongarm the european council into accepting for Juncker. I agree with you that some kind of political reform to have a more representation union would be welcome, but your interpretation of this event is a bit overblown.
jariel 6y ago
"You voted for A a long time ago over there, who appointed B over here, who supported C up there, who finally backed D - the leader you never heard of - so it's all very democratic!" Von der Leyen was not elected in any reasonable sense of the term. Voters went to the polls without knowing who she was, or her platform. They thought they were effectively voting for someone else. They were told that the 'deal' was that so-and-so would be the victor - but at the last minute after the election the people with power changed their minds and changed norms, and in a completely untransparent backroom deal - they chose a different leader. The President of EU Commission is a bad example of positive democracy and it's almost impossible to justify on those terms. It is what it is unfortunately, I'm not sure what the right answer is, but the current situation isn't near perfect. As for the statement - it's reasonable that there should be regulations - but the EU leadership shouldn't make such bold edicts: "You cannot do this, you must do as we say" - not a good way to start. They don't have this kind of legitimacy. They should position it as: "We don't believe corporations should be making these decisions without a framework provided by the people of the EU, so we'd like to work with them to provide some regulatory leadership"
sampo 6y ago
European Union analog for America: State governors are not voted, but chosen by the state legislatures: EU countries' prime ministers Replace senate with a meeting of state governors: European Council, Council of EU Replace president with a commission of 50 presidents (EU: 27), one from each state, chosen by the state legislature, not by elections: EU Commission State legislatures are voted as normal (but proportional voting, not FPTP). The US house of representatives is voted as normal (again proportional voting). But the house can't propose new legislation, only approve or decline proposals from the senate and the commission.

turbinerneiter 6y ago

She was not elected by the voters. The voters were told that the winning party's candidate would be the commission president. Now von der Leyen is. She did not run in the election. This is a lot more similar to the electoral college making the losing candidate president than people want to admit. We elected the parliament under the impression that the MEPs would then elect the candidate of the party that got the most votes. Then, they didn't. The EU is not very democratic and if we don't fix that, we will lose it. And that is the last thing I want. I want the EU to succeed.

zajio1am 6y ago
> She was not elected by the voters. The voters were told that the winning party's candidate would be the commission president. Now von der Leyen is. She did not run in the election. Well, this is true for prime minister posts in most parliamentary democracies. The winner is not the leader of plurality-winning party, but one who can get majority support in parliament. Usually it is the same person, but EP is too disintegrated for that (many small parties with only token loyality to party blocs), so plurality winner failed to get majority support. Had MEPs forged majority coalition, they would have rejected EC offer and have forced their commission president.
- jariel 6y ago
  This argument doesn't work very well because even in Parliamentary systems there is good clarity as to what people are voting for. Your arguments is resting on technicalities, but not on the realities of awareness and participation of voters. Boris Johnson had a questionable first phase as PM due to his inherited position, a lack of confidence - so - there was an election. Not only did everyone in the UK know who they were voting for in terms of individual leadership, but very much in terms of policy. It was also an 'issue election'. The affirmation of 'Boris to complete Brexit' was clear, democratic and decisive (however people may disagree with the result). Voters clearly 'had their say'. The EU does not have any such relevance in terms of issues, ideology, leadership, policy, participation, regulatory clarity, which makes it's democratic credentials kind of questionable. They do some good work though, it's just going to be a problem when the are at odds with the people. Edit: I should add, the fact there was no public awareness at all of Von der Leyen - there was no opportunity for scrutiny, press inquisition, background awareness - is obviously problematic from a democratic perspective.
  - zajio1am 6y ago
    UK is bit of special case, as although it has parliamentary system, because of single-member districts it gravitates to two-party situation with clear winners. That is rarely case in other countries, where PM often depends on fragile coalition formed after election.
    - jariel 6y ago
      Canada has a stable 3-party (+1, Greens) Parliamentary system. But either way - even in more proportional systems, people know what they are voting for. In the EU, they generally do not.
  - turbinerneiter 6y ago
    Exactly, von der Leyen could never have won a fair election, because she was involved in a scandal around illegal contracts for consultants - in any proper election, someone with a recent scandal like, particularly revolving around spending public money I'm a wrong way, would be toxic and no party would even run them as their candidate.
pyrale 6y ago
> This is a lot more similar to the electoral college making the losing candidate president than people want to admit. Not really comparable, as Von der Leyen and Weber, the denied spitzenkandidat were from the same party. The fact is that the spitzenkandidat system is not an official rule, it's just an informal agreement that the previous legislature managed to strongarm the european council into accepting for Juncker. I agree with you that some kind of political reform to have a more representation union would be welcome, but your interpretation of this event is a bit overblown.

jariel 6y ago

"You voted for A a long time ago over there, who appointed B over here, who supported C up there, who finally backed D - the leader you never heard of - so it's all very democratic!" Von der Leyen was not elected in any reasonable sense of the term. Voters went to the polls without knowing who she was, or her platform. They thought they were effectively voting for someone else. They were told that the 'deal' was that so-and-so would be the victor - but at the last minute after the election the people with power changed their minds and changed norms, and in a completely untransparent backroom deal - they chose a different leader. The President of EU Commission is a bad example of positive democracy and it's almost impossible to justify on those terms. It is what it is unfortunately, I'm not sure what the right answer is, but the current situation isn't near perfect. As for the statement - it's reasonable that there should be regulations - but the EU leadership shouldn't make such bold edicts: "You cannot do this, you must do as we say" - not a good way to start. They don't have this kind of legitimacy. They should position it as: "We don't believe corporations should be making these decisions without a framework provided by the people of the EU, so we'd like to work with them to provide some regulatory leadership"

sampo 6y ago

European Union analog for America: State governors are not voted, but chosen by the state legislatures: EU countries' prime ministers Replace senate with a meeting of state governors: European Council, Council of EU Replace president with a commission of 50 presidents (EU: 27), one from each state, chosen by the state legislature, not by elections: EU Commission State legislatures are voted as normal (but proportional voting, not FPTP). The US house of representatives is voted as normal (again proportional voting). But the house can't propose new legislation, only approve or decline proposals from the senate and the commission.