Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook
Featured Arizona Cardinals Kamala Harris Barclay Goodrow Porter Moser Trump


DN Debate. Voting on the prime minister so that parliament will vote on the budget

In december, parliament to adopt a new budget, regardless of whether regeringsfrågan been solved or not. The rules for budgetvoteringen is designed so that exactly et the draft budget will be adopted regardless of the political deadlocks that exist in the chamber. A government's main task is to get the parliament to adopt its budget. Voteringsreglerna for budgetomröstningar diverges significantly from the rules for statsministeromröstningar, which seems problematic in the light of recent events. It would therefore be reasonable to change the constitution provision for statsministeromröstningen (chapter 6, section. Section 4) so that it more resembles the rules of the budget being passed.

to be eligible For the prime minister is required in day to candidate tolerated by the chamber, that is to say, not the majority. However, it might happen that all the candidates has a majority against him, which the frenchman Condorcet publicized in a paper already in 1785. With three blocks, which are approximately of the same height, it is quite possible that A and B vote down C, B, and C voting down A and C and A voting down B. the Result is that none of the three statsministerkandidaterna tolerated by the chamber.

M, the KD and SD have the majority against himself, S, V and MP also have the majority against himself and all the evidence suggests that although C, L and MP has a majority against him.

the budget process is in comparison with regeringsbildningsprocessen a miracle of efficiency and reliability.

as the constitution is written, it is thought that the threat of new elections to prevent the negative cyclical majorities. After four unsuccessful attempts, the citizens get automatically go to the ballot box, which is supposed to stimulate the willingness to compromise in the house. But the threat of early elections is no successful solution to the Condorcets problem for two reasons:

We risk, once again, get three blocks in pairs of two to vote down the third. Condorcet teaches us that there is no mathematical guarantee that we will ever get a new government as the instrument of government, chapter 6. 4§ today is formulated.

He knows that it is uncertain whether he becomes president in the next parliament. This makes it tempting to continue drinking coffee for a very long time. From the president's point of view is an election, no solution, not even in a situation with a negative cyclical majorities.

the budget process is in comparison with regeringsbildningsprocessen a miracle of efficiency and reliability. Each party has the opportunity to add their own draft budget, which is then eliminated gradually in a series of polls. In the last and deciding vote is set two budget proposals against each other and the option that receives the most votes wins. The practice has been that each party votes on its own budget, and then lay down their votes. However, there is no strict rule about this. In the autumn of 2014 voted SD in the Alliance's budget, which forced the social democrats to rule with the ”wrong” budget until Decemberöverenskommelsen made it possible to adopt a rödgrön budget.

Much to suggest that the Conservatives budgetmotion in the fall, the support of the KD and SD, which means that the in this case, the 154 votes. A draft budget, which is supported by S, V, and MP would get 144 votes. This means, in practice, the Centre party and the Liberals determines the budget being passed. If they lay down their votes, which they said they would do, win the Conservatives budget. But if C and L do not want to let a budget that is supported by the SD control, the country can mittenblocket instead vote for the red-green budget.

In the budget being passed, therefore, there is no risk that there occurs a Condorcetsituation with the negative cyclical majorities. From a purely pragmatic point of view, the rules that govern the budget being passed more reliable than the rules for appointing the prime minister.

As the government's most important task is to get through its budget, it would be reasonable to change the constitution so that governments can be formed in the same way as the parliament adopts the budget, however, with the difference that the government is formed only once after each election. In practice, this would mean that every party must put a ”statsministermotion”. When their own party's motion (industrialized) has been eliminated, the party may choose to support other parties statsministermotioner. In shortlisting are the two most popular candidates against each other.

Regardless of how they choose will be the process to come to a conclusion on a democratic impeccable way. If the Centre party and the Liberals put down their votes wins Kristersson, just as in the budget being passed, but if they vote against Kristersson (as they recently did) win the Leaves.

It seems reasonable that the parties that win the budget being passed also holds the government.

the President is not involved in budgetförhandlingen, which is reasonable. It is therefore difficult to explain why the president should have influence over the formation of the government. If the parties are able to adopt a budget without the president's help (the president's only role is to lead the debate and the vote) should the parties also be able to form a government without the president's help.

the Proposal needs to be combined with rules for how governments can be forced to resign. One possibility is to maintain approximately the rules that now applies: 35 members can force a misstroendevotering, but the form of voting would then follow the new rules for statsministeromröstningar.

But unlike american politicians, we have a fairly pragmatic view of the constitution and is willing to change it as verkligenheten change. After lotteririksdagen during the seventies reduced the number of members in the chamber from 350 to 349 members of the pragmatic reasons. In order to avoid the problem down the negative cyclical majorities we need to make a similar correction of chapter 6. Section 4 of the constitution.

Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.