Perhaps a Better Political System?
The elections for the European Parliament made me think once again of a better political system within the existing general structures, perhaps a necessary step towards a system which could actually be good. I’ve had this idea for quite a long time now but, as is the case with a lot of other things, never wrote about it.
Unlike most of my others, this idea won’t exactly be revolutionary and certainly won’t be drastic. The current political system simply isn’t working, so it must be replaced with one that does; finding something which actually works well could be left for later, as the next step. Politics are also less important than environmentalism and the other specific issues I care about, because if we were to take that “whatever works” approach then things would happen with or without help from the authorities, meaning that we could leave finding a solution to the world’s political problems until after we’ll solve those which really can’t wait. These two arguments make it desirable to attempt to immediately change the political system in a way which would make it somewhat better while at the same time not requiring a complete overhaul or the use of force.
I’ll start from the top and say that I’d like to see a system with clearly defined layers, where each layer has greater power of decision than those below it but can also control those above it. The power of decision applies to the things that involve the country in question, while the control involves keeping a close eye on those with more power, not allowing them to use their authority for personal gain.
I believe that a country’s president must certainly be its ruler, not just a figurehead as is the case of parliamentary republics. The president should have the final word in any decision that falls under the responsibility of that country’s central governing body, but also the right to delegate certain responsibilities to members of the government, when he or she feels unable to make that decision properly, whether from lack of the necessary skills, information or time. If the president chooses to make use of this right but the government is unable to agree on a decision, the issue will be once again brought before the president, who will be asked to settle the argument by either siding with one of the points of view expressed by members of the government or delegating the responsibility for that particular decision to the parliament or even the people.
After the president comes the government, with all its departments. Their primary duty should be to aid the president by creating reports and legislative projects, offering suggestions, summarizing the debates which have taken place in the parliament and making the decisions the president asks them to make in his or her place. On top of that, they should always listen carefully to the parliament’s suggestions in order to keep in close contact with the needs and desires of the people. They should also have the right, but not the obligation, to control the president as described above.
Next comes the parliament, which could have one or two chambers. One chamber is all that’s needed for smaller and more centralized countries, while two chambers are very useful for larger and more decentralized countries. In case two chambers will be used, one should be made up of representatives of the various regions, counties, major cities or other authorities which are placed directly below the central governing body. The other chamber, or the only chamber in case only one will be needed, should be made up of representatives of all the existing points of view and interest groups in that country, represented more or less equally, and not of a proportional number of members of each party which obtained at least a certain percentage of the votes at the last elections. That way a tyranny of the majority will be avoided, allowing all points of view to be presented and requiring serious discussion and negotiation. The parliament’s primary role should be to maintain the connection between the people and the government, creating reports and legislative projects for the government according to the needs and desires of the people and also explaining the government’s actions and the legislative process to the people in terms which can be understood by anyone who’s at least somewhat interested in these issues. The parliament should also have the very important right and obligation of controlling the government and the president. In fact, this form of control would represent the parliament’s single major decision making power, seeing as they would have the right to decide the dissolution of the government if they deem that its members use their authority for personal gain. They would also have the right to suspend the president for the same reason, but the people would have the final say in that matter, through a referendum, because the people elect the president and only they have the right to withdraw that mandate.
One advantage of this system is that it could work on all levels, all the way down to individual towns and villages. In that case, the mayor would correspond to the president, the various administrative departments (and especially the heads of these departments) would correspond to the government and the local council would correspond to the parliament.
Another advantage is that it creates a clear separation of powers without generating conflicts between the various layers. A lower layer has the right to take away a higher layer’s decision making power, but that will only happen under very specific circumstances, namely when those from said higher layer use their authority for personal gain. Otherwise all important decisions are made by the president or by those the president chooses to delegate that particular responsibility to. There is never more than one layer involved in making a decision and no layer is allowed to take away the rights of another simply because they disagree when it comes to a certain decision.
A third advantage comes from the composition of the parliament, which encourages dialogue and eliminates the tyranny of the majority. A bicameral parliament under this system would also encourage true decentralization, giving the various regions, counties and important cities a direct link to the government, ensuring that their particular needs and desires are known and tended to at the highest level.
A fourth advantage is that it does ensure that level of control which current systems of government lack. They allow for people to be removed from office because of disagreements over certain decisions, which is bad, but they don’t provide the necessary framework for controlling those who use their authority for personal gain, which is even worse. This way, there would be specific regulations which would determine when can a person lose their decision making powers and also specific people appointed to check whether or not those conditions have been met.
And lastly, but perhaps most importantly, this system would ensure that the different layers would keep communicating and also that there would always be a strong exchange of information between the people and the government, seeing as the parliament’s primary duty would be to ensure just this exchange of information. Right now it’s all too often that you see a complete lack of meaningful communication between the people and the central governing body, and that needs to change right away!
