Tag: elections

  • Links from the week of 24 October 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Links from the week of 3 October 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Just watched the opening speeches at the @DemNext_ launch event from last night (on…

    Just watched the opening speeches at the @DemNext_ launch event from last night (on YouTube via their Twitter account and well worth a watch), and @ClaudiaChwalisz‘s vision of what the sortition-governed future could like got me thinking about numbers.

    The question I wanted to answer is how often would an average citizen be likely to be called to serve, and how many “veterans” or currently-serving people would they be likely to know.

    I decided to plug my home country into a spreadsheet. Belgium has 11 million people and a famously multi-layered governance structure, so lots of opportunities. I also assumed that 20% of the population were not of voting age.

    The top level is the Federal Government. Let’s assume a Federal executive assembly would be 300 people (twice the size of the current Federal Parliament). With annual selections you would be selected every 30 891 years.

    We then have five regions (Flanders, Wallonia, Brussels, German-speaking region and the Wallon-Brussels Federation – I told you it was complicated). If there are 200 people on a regional executive assembly, you get selected every 9 267 years.

    Then, there are ten provinces (Brussels is in historic Brabant but is a region not a province, so I discounted it). If each provincial executive assembly has 100 members, your chance of selection is once every 8 067 (and never in Brussels).

    Finally, 581 communes from Antwerp (500k people) to Herstappe (79). Some are divided into districts so I’ve upped the number to 700. If each local executive has 75 members, your average chance of selection is once every 177 years – though it’s every year if you live in Herstappe!

    There are of course also lots of topic-specific panels on things like judge appointments (to use Claudia’s example), so we have to make some assumptions there too.

    I’ve assumed that each panel is half the size of the relevant Executive Assembly, and that there are 40 at federal level, 30 in each region, 20 in each province and 10 in each locality each year.

    In total, that means that the chance of serving on any one of those bodies in any given year is 3,2% – so in other words you might be selected every 31 years, or twice in your adult life (at all, not to a specific Assembly).

    On assumptions about sizes of family and friends group, you could expect someone in your extended family to serve every 2-3 years, and if you have 100 friends, 3 of them would be serving at any one time, so by middle age half of your friendship group would be veterans.

    Because there are two levels of selection, if we assume a 10:1 ratio in first invitation responders to second invitation then you could expect an invitation letter for something every three years or so, but nine times out of ten you would not be selected.

    How does that compare numerically to the Belgian system? Not every part of the Belgian system is directly elected (some of the regional bodies and the provincial councils aren’t directly elected), and there are local, regional and national elections on a regular timetable.

    If you live from 18 to 80, on these assumptions about sortition you will be invited 20 times and serve twice. On the current system you will vote about 34 times (12 times each for region and federal, 10 times for the 6-year commune councils).

    Now, voting is a very different sort of democratic transaction from being invited to take on actual political power in an executive assembly, but one of the challenges for the sortition-only model for me is whether people are going to be prepared to give up

    a less-effective vote every five or six years for a much more powerful role in a process (that they can’t select) at two random points in their life, and maybe not at all.

    It goes without saying that there are huge caveats here. If there are 400 or 4000 national panels rather than 40 that changes the numbers – it depends on what level of decision would need a panel and which would be left the to bureaucracy.

  • While I don’t think fair elections can be called undemocratic, it’s clear that the…

    While I don’t think fair elections can be called undemocratic, it’s clear that the Chilean constitutional assembly didn’t work. A sortition-based process + referendum could be a better alternative, with strong anti-gaming and anti-corruption measures. twitter.com/ClaudiaChwalis…

    It would certainly be an interesting facilitation task – though having facilitated a good number of CAs, I suspect you might get the long list of social rights again (though perhaps the process would be less open to attack from the right as being a leftist wish list).

    In general, the big principles are well suited to deliberative exercises if validated by referendum – the fine controversial detail perhaps less so.

  • Links from the week of 18 July 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Great piece by @samfr in by @jburnmurdoch but Brexit didn’t make the UK a more tolerant…

    Great piece by @samfr in thread by @jburnmurdoch but Brexit didn’t make the UK a more tolerant nation, it was already becoming one. If Brexit vote were today it would fail. This is why Cameron’s self-serving narrative about having to call the referendum is nonsense. twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/s…

    He could have held out and attitudes would have shifted. Perhaps not as much, perhaps not as fast, but it was moving in the right direction.

    Admittedly, while Brexit is terrible for the UK and personally very painful, I also think that for European unity, it has not been a universally bad thing. It’s certainly opening up possibilities that UK would have blocked.

  • 45% would be disturbing new high for the French far-right but …

    45% would be disturbing new high for the French far-right but …
    (and this is not criticism of Mij, who is v level-headed on it)
    1. Not all those votes are far right votes. Some are anti-system votes, some are anti-Macron votes. twitter.com/Mij_Europe/sta…

    2. Vote rot = inevitably more anti-Macron votes when he is defending his record after five years.
    3. Zemmour did Le Pen a favour by staking out even farther right positions
    4. Le Pen is a figure that people are more familiar with now and cost of living crisis is good for her

    5. Electoral system is handling Dutchification v badly. 2-round means representative of the universal 25% anti-system voting bloc will always get to run off against a fragmented mainstream.
    6. Le Pen vote will be the 2022 high point for RN. Assemblée elections will not go well.

    None of this is to say we shouldn’t be worried, but this is not “one more heave” and then the far right win. The non-extreme parties have five years to reconfigure themselves into a winning format for the post-Macron era. Maybe they will, maybe they won’t but they can.

  • Links from the week of 13 December 2021

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • I wasn’t in Florence for #cofoe #TheFutureIsYours, though @demsoc colleagues were.

    I wasn’t in Florence for #cofoe #TheFutureIsYours, though @demsoc colleagues were. I see a lot of people here talking about one recommendation (on more European citizen assemblies) but it’s worth saying there were almost 40 others, on a much wider range of issues.

    For me the most interesting recommendations were those on rule of law and media freedom, confirming that these aren’t just elite/Brussels bubble concerns but the concerns of citizens from around Europe.

    Also worth noting is how much citizens overall saw Europe as a level of government that needed direct accountability to them – not surprising in some ways but a big change from the state-based proto-confederalism that is the structural logic of today’s EU.

    This came out most clearly in the recommendation on (what are known in Brussels as) transnational lists for the European Parliament – a voting system that would force candidates to appeal across national boundaries.

    So read the whole list to see a lot of interesting ideas, beyond more CAs, delivered in a very short time. Over to the citizen ambassadors and the others at the conference plenary to see what they can do with this raw material.

  • Labour chasing anti immigrant voters?

    Labour chasing anti immigrant voters? twitter.com/paulwaugh/stat…

    Video on Twitter

    Is Brexit not enough? Destroying economic and social ties with our continent not enough. No, of course Brexit is not enough *because nothing will ever be enough*.

    If you chase after populists, you will become a populist, and people will vote for the real thing not the copy. (Juncker’s comment from a few years back, still true except in the case of the Tories where they cannibalised the far right. But Labour can’t do that.