3 ms·
I've been thinking that maybe we need the opposite - a citizens veto. The threshold would have to be high enough to ensure it's not abused by individual groups
by Timon3 3y ago
I've been thinking that maybe we need the opposite - a citizens veto. The threshold would have to be high enough to ensure it's not abused by individual groups (maybe 2/3rds?), but the ability for the population to decide against measures (maybe even individual parts of omnibus bills) would create new controls against overreach without completely throwing away the current system.
- notrlyskeptik 3y agoNo-confidence votes by citizens to remove misbehaving politicians from the their position and the states payroll, including pensions 'n stuff.
- Timon3 3y agoI could see this leading to abuse through populism. A better way might be to track the number of vetoed laws brought in by each politician, and to have removal be an automatic consequence of too many. This would broaden the blast radius to everyone involved, making everyone accountable, while only going after repeat offenders.