This is the best way to enact laws and regulations during emergencies where getting people to vote for the next step can be hard. It is also a wise form of government that speeds up the decision-making process because it is easy for 50 people to become conscious than million people. And the faster the decisions are made, the better the government projects are executed to benefit its citizens.
In comparison with a direct form of governance whereby people have to read the whole document, prepare for a voting day and voting counting process before making simple policies into practice and delaying the project execution and other benefits, thus giving people time to enjoy simple benefits that they would have done simply in one day.
They also have the power to discern who the best candidate is to represent their interest and defend the opinions and beliefs they hold so strong. While holding education and training experiences constant, this form of governance allows people or each state to feel part of the team, making government laws.
The aim is to have each and everyone well represented in any law-making process. The best way to ensure that all are represented is by having each group of people represented by someone chosen by a citizen.
Making citizen be part of the leading team improve the law-making process and speed up choices. As long as one is eligible to vote, each vote counts on the laws and regulations that the elected person will pass or draft as economic, infrastructure, and social amenities.
As a citizen being part of this solution makes each an everyone happy and part of the country. In this form of governance, the citizens eligible to vote elect their representatives to represent them and table the views and opinions to the parliament. With this approach, the people can cast out their thoughts and wishes through their elected representatives.
And when they think or feel like some of their ideologies and views are not properly dealt with, they can air their complaints, and their legislatures can act on the same.
With an equal representative by the elected legislative body, the government will be able to spot and identify what is good for a specific state or group of people since the elected person is supposed to have opinions and interests. This way, the government will work on what the elected person has tabled or presented before them. It is also assumed that what the legislatures have is what the people need.
It is easy for the federal government to execute suggestions instead of million suggestions from different citizens. This also reduces congestion of ideas and opinions and making it easy for the government or relevant body to allocate what is good for the country and the people in each state.
As they say, it is all about decisions that lead a countries ability to grow. According to the national governance, there is an increased number of people voting anytime there is an election, which means people feel valued when engaged or their decisions are part of the government. Representing representatives in the government, each with a unique need for people in different states makes the government allocation programs faster and easier. Any suggestion made by the elected person is considered as what people need.
When it comes to government infrastructure, social amenities, and other allocation, the process is summarized to what the representative have for their people. People will just put their trust and faith in their elected legislatures. Eliminating them from accessing the law-making body is not guaranteed that the person elected will deliver the same. In countries with high corruption rates, this form of government has failed terribly as politicians or elected persons tend to forget all they promised.
This can only be trusted in countries with high democracy integrity. Still, for many developing countries, this form of governance allows few people to make choices, not the majority of the voters. There are situations when the majority do not have a favorable opinion, and better choices are not entirely on what many people think.
If they did, it could result in a lost election during the next cycle. For a representative to truly represent their district, they must be in constant contact with their constituents.
Without open communication, it may be difficult to represent the needs of the district to the government. This is also necessary because most representatives travel great distances to handle the needs of governing at the national level. In the United States, that means representatives must travel to Washington, D.
That could be over 4, miles away. Only a proactive representative would be able to stay on top of locally important issues from such a great distance. For a representative democracy to function properly, the people who have elected their representative must trust that they will represent local needs to the government.
Because the structure of representation is often loosely defined, it is possible for politicians to represent their own interests to the government instead of representing the interests of those who elected them. If a recall is not possible, it could be up to 6 years before that person could be replaced with someone who had more integrity. It is true that a representative democracy is cheaper to operate than a direct democracy. There are other forms of government, however, that are even cheaper than this one.
Elections held for the Senate and the House of Representatives are multi-million dollar affairs. Then there are state and local elections that must be held as well.
The goal of a politician within a representative democracy is to get elected as a representative. That provides the incentive to the politician to say or do anything, so they can win the election.
Many politicians will offer blanket promises to the general public to gain enough votes to win. Then, once elected, they are no longer bound to the promises that they offered. The people may be upset, call the politician a liar, and even begin the process of forcing them out of office. None of that matters. Once the politician is elected, they can begin to influence legislation for almost any purpose.
In a representative democracy, legislation is based on the will of the majority. That means the voice of the minority, though heard, is often discarded. That can be problematic if the voice of the majority is not morally correct. There are numerous instances in U. Yet, because the government rules from the majority, that is the course of action that is taken. That means a true reflection of the majority may not be achieved by the election, but the results are what form the foundation of legislation.
In some situations, if the minority turns out more than the majority for an election, they can influence the results in such a way that the will of the people is countered. It takes involvement for a representative democracy to be accurate and that does not always occur. Under the current representative structure of the United States, each state is awarded two senators and a delegation of representatives that are based on the population levels.
That means larger states are allowed to elect more representatives to the House than smaller states. Since , the total number of representatives allowed in the U. A populous state like California has more than 50 representatives, but a state like Montana or Alaska may have only 1. If push comes to shove, California is going to have more influence on national affairs than Montana will.
Representative democracies have loopholes and legislation problems that make it possible to go around the structure of representation.
Tolerance of opposition: This form of government is more likely to tolerate the views and suggestions of opposition groups, because members of the opposition are also members of parliament. Press freedom: Representative government allows greater press freedom, which enables even the representatives themselves to publicize their policies and programmes to the people.
Representative government recognizes the existence of political parties that compete to control the machinery of government. The struggle to control government institutions sometimes leads to instability of the government. Representative government involves the risk of handing over the fate of all the citizens to a small group of people in government.
This is because it is not easy for an individual to adequately represent the many opinions and interests of the people in a particular constituency.
Representative government has the capacity to foster electoral malpractices because the competing parties sometimes employ illegal means to capture political power. In representative government, the best candidates often lose elections.
Instead, unpopular candidates and political parties that can skillfully manipulate the electoral process in their favour, get elected. The ruling party in representative government may, to the disadvantage of other parties, create additional constituencies in areas they are likely to be favoured during future elections. This practice is known as gerrymandering. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
0コメント