Originally posted by PowerdocGood you see the necessity of avoiding coalitions, but don't you think that the parliamentary procedures to avoid them are an utopia.
I don't expect to eliminate the formation of coalitions under multi-party systems, I'd merely hope to rule out the necessity
to form coalitions, and reduce the power that any such coalitions would hold.
For example, a legislative body could use the same form of voting internally that I propose for public elections, with weighted choices and run-off votes. This way, committee appointments and other roles could be assigned without a majority party or coalition being required to decide who does what. There need be no paralysis waiting for fractured governments to reform into new coalitions.
Be carefull, even if it's good that the judicial branch could overturn politicians willing to do a free ride, the judicial branch should not be above the political system.
Democratia is a story of representation, mostly indirect, because we are too big for direct democratia. The judicial branch is not truly representative.
I think it's good that this branch check if something is constitutional or not, but it should not go further : i am agaisnt the republic of the judges.
I'm not talking about a huge extension of judicial power. Judges already have the power to declare laws unconstitional in the US and other contries. I'm merely proposing that the requirement for focused legislation (no "riders", no hidden "pork" 750 pages into a 1000 page bill, etc.) be one of the criteria under which a judge can find a law to be unconstitutional.