Daily votes would be unworkable, true. I anticipate monthly votes instead,
making them more of an event, and requiring a strict majority (50% of the
eligible voters, rather than simply outnumbering the opposing view) to avoid
games based on seasonal population engagement.
This of course will limit
the number of laws that can be passed per year,
which as far as I'm concerned
is a good thing - it would focus attention on
laws that need to be made. To
reduce the *need* for fiddly little bits of
legislation, the fundamental laws
should explicitly allow for common sense to
be used in court.
Likewise, it
is indeed unreasonable to expect every citizen to read a law in it's
entirety
before voting on it. But that's what the public commentary period is
for - to
allow the minority who *do* like to do that (people like us) to notice
and
point out any glaring flaws in each law in good time for the vote. Or,
indeed,
to say: "This law is too complex to understand fully, and therefore I
cannot be
sure that it does not hide something nasty. Surely there is a
simpler way of
solving the stated problem. Vote against it to be safe."
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|