Slashdot Mirror
Chinese Legislature Conducts Large Online Vote
hackingbear writes "In a bid to reform the tax law and raise person tax exemption to 3000 Yuan per month (or about US$5000 per year,) from 2000 Yuan per month, the Chinese legislature has conducted a massive online vote on the pending legislation. The [National People's Congress] Standing Committee, China's top legislature, on Wednesday publicized suggestions and opinions on amending the Law on Individual Income Tax that were submitted online from April 25 to May 31. Among all 82,707 citizens who commented on the proposal, [only] 15 percent of them favored raising the exemption to 3,000 yuan. However, 48 percent suggested to further raise the exemption to 5,000 yuan per month. While the online votes are not binding, the outcome likely shape the final bill. We'd hope the US Congress would dare to collect real citizen input on its legislation, rather than just doing lip service or useless political arguments."
China has just locked up a large number of dissidents, including Zhao Lianhai, who ran a website about the poisoned baby-milk scandal after his own son became ill.
A few months back, they put a girl in a labor camp for posting a sarcastic comment on twitter.
A good portion of the stories on slashdot would probably get you a jail sentence if you posted them in China.
I may not get 'online voting', then again maybe online voting is just a way to track who the troublemakers are - like Mao's Hundred Flowers campaign.
California has destroyed my faith in direct democracy. See Proposition 13: "I want the windfall from housing inflation to go straight into my pocket!" Congratulations to the folks who voted themselves hundreds of thousands of dollars in unearned income, but now the state is broke, people living right next door to each other pay VASTLY different burdens in supporting schools and other social services, and the housing pyramid scheme eventually collapsed anyways. Instead, they should simply have deferred some portion the property taxes until the next transfer of ownership.
Actually, I wouldn't worry about the results not getting released. Instead we would get loaded questions designed to influence the results. A skilled pollster could move public opinion pretty far based on how they ask the questions, and there is no way they would be unbiased. "Do you support closing the gun show loophole" vs "Do you support the ban on the sale of guns between private citizens without requiring a gun shop as an intermediary" Same outcome, but will get very different results.
I believe the only way a true democracy can be run is if individual citizens are allowed to vote on legislation proposed by their representatives, rather than having the representatives do the voting.
This is a terrible idea. What we'd end up with is a situation (like now) where 99% of the population doesn't have the time (or interest) to read the legislation or vote on it, but also a situation where the remaining 1% would control what gets passed and doesn't get passed. That remaining 1% would be composed largely of trolls, unemployed busybodies, single-issue-firebrands (using their vote as leverage to promote their unrelated pet cause), and people who are getting paid under the table to vote for/against the bill by, parties who would profit from its passage or failure. There would be much less accountability than in our current system.
Be careful what you wish for!
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - Kay, Men In Black
Direct democracy can be a terrifying thing to behold. Just as the unregulated free market works great until people discover how to exploit negative externalities, direct democracy works great until people discover that they can vote themselves all kinds of short-term benefits and leave the long-term costs to the next generation.
The idea behind representative democracy is that the people can make their will known to their representatives, but it's the representatives who will consider all aspects of the issue and balance short-term and long-term considerations so that they choose the best possible alternative. That's the theory, anyway. Unfortunately the system is only as good as the quality of the representatives, and in an age where our representatives seem to be chosen more for their entertainment value than their intelligence and statesmanship it's not much better than direct democracy. Sometimes it's even worse.
Well it's certainly implied. If citizen's vote on every single piece of legislation, then it's majority rules. Having lived in many places and now residing in California, where 'the people' are given a chance to vote directly for all kinds of weird legislative proposals, I can tell you that the majority here make plenty of bad decisions.
Actually making use of technology to drive government.
This seems to be a survey, not a vote. So it is pretty much what occasionally happens in the US too. Suveys and focus groups are used to get feedback and to craft legislation and/or how the legislation is presented.
I believe the only way a true democracy can be run is if individual citizens are allowed to vote on legislation proposed by their representatives, rather than having the representatives do the voting. It would encourage the reps to actually engage their voting populations, otherwise their legislation dies.
Many wise men have characterized such a system as mob rule. Legislators would simply pander to the mob, its not terribly different than what happens today. Why are the NRA and AARP so powerful, its not money, its their ability to deliver voters to the polls. In short big money donors may have less influence but special interest groups will gain influence.
The real solution is to elect representatives that have intelligence, ethics and character. An extreme example from history, Cincinnatus:
"... an invasion caused him to be called to serve Rome as dictator, an office which he immediately resigned after completing his task of defeating the rivaling tribes of the Aequians, Sabines and Volscians. His abandoning of his work to serve Rome, and especially his immediate resignation of his absolute authority with the end of the crisis, has often been cited as an example of outstanding leadership, service to the greater good, civic virtue, and modesty"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnatus