Archive for the ‘Democracy’ Category

Go back, Viceroy of Delhi – The Indian Express

Democracy is government of the people, by the people and for the people, said Abraham Lincoln. That remains the simplest and most comprehensive definition of democracy. At the centre of the government are the people. Representative democracy is only a matter of convenience when the numbers are large.

India is a federal state. Delhi is the National Capital of India. It is acknowledged that the government of Delhi has to be different from the governments of states; yet, if that government must be a democratic government, it must put the people at the centre of the government.

The Supreme Court, as the final interpreter and arbiter of the Constitution, said in State (NCT of Dehi) v Union of India: (2018) 8 SCC 501: The exercise of constituent power is meant to confer democratic, societal and political powers on the citizens who reside within the National Capital Territory of Delhi that has been granted a special status. The Court quoted with approval Jaganmohan Reddy J who had said in Kesavananda Bharati that democratic form of government is part of the basic structure of the Constitution.

Constituent Power

The powers and functions of the Delhi government were finally settled by the exercise of the constituent power of Parliament. The Constitution of India was amended in 1991 and Article 239AA was inserted to provide Special provisions with respect to Delhi. The Statement of Objects and Reasons made it clear that Delhi should continue to be a Union Territory and provided with a Legislative Assembly and a Council of Ministers responsible to such Assembly with appropriate powers to deal with matters of concern to the common man.

Article 239AA used words and phrases that had acquired a meaning in every democratic country. Among them were direct election from territorial constituencies, the Legislative Assembly shall have the power to make laws with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List or in the Concurrent List and, most importantly, There shall be a Council of Ministers with the Chief Minister at the head to aid and advise the Lieutenant Governor in the exercise of his functions. The Government of the National Territory Act, 1991, was made under Article 239AA to give effect to the provisions contained in that Article.

The Dog and the Tail

In the last 20 years, there were instances when the tail (LG) tried to wag the dog (the council of ministers), but such attempts were put down with a firm hand. Attitudes changed after 2014. The BJP government in Delhi could not tolerate a non-BJP government in Delhi. In particular, the Prime Minister could not tolerate a Chief Minister sharing the political space in Delhi. Hence, a determined effort was made to resurrect the long-buried controversy of who exactly has the real power in the Delhi government.

The attempt was thwarted by the Supreme Court, in State (NCT of Delhi) v Union of India. On July 4, 2018, the Supreme Court declared that the meaning of aid and advise employed in Article 239AA(4) has to be construed to mean that the Lieutenant Governor of the NCT of Delhi is bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.

Mr Modi is a man of considerable ego (as I suspect all prime ministers are) and does not give up his pursuit of wrong goals. He bided his time and chose to strike when the country was focused on crucial elections in four states and one Union Territory. He could not touch Article 239AA because the NDA does not have a two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament; so, he chose the lesser option of amending the Government of the National Capital Territory Act, 1991. Mocking the Supreme Court, the Statement of Objects and Reasons said that the amendment Bill was brought forward in order to give effect to the interpretation made by the Honble Supreme Court! In truth, the Bill is a clumsy attempt to overrule the judgement of the Supreme Court.

Patently Unconstitutional

The Bill amends the law by stipulating that the expression Government shall mean the Lieutenant Governor. Thus, by definition, the tail is the dog and the dog is the tail! The Bill also provides that before taking any executive action to exercise powers of Government the opinion of the Lieutenant Governor shall be obtained on all such matters as may be specified. By legislative legerdemain, the Modi government has installed its Viceroy in Delhi!

Mr Arvind Kejriwal and his ministers have been reduced to footmen to fetch and carry for the Viceroy.

Mr Kejriwal should have known that this day was coming when, in another constitutional coup, Jammu & Kashmir was dismembered and reduced to two Union Territories. Yet, Mr Kejriwal supported that assault on democracy in the name of nationalism. Today, it is his day of reckoning and humiliation. Nevertheless, my sympathies are with him if he chooses to fight the Modi government.

Democracy in India is diminished every day. The world has taken note of the fact that India is only partly free. The goal of the BJP is to establish one-party rule, an over-sized and rubber-stamping Parliament, a compliant judiciary, an officially sponsored media, obedient corporates, and a subservient people who will be happy with material progress. That India will be no different from China. It is deja vu 1935, the Government of India Act, 1935, and Go Back Simon.

Continue reading here:
Go back, Viceroy of Delhi - The Indian Express

Democracy 4 on Steam

Democracy 4 lets you take the role of President / Prime minister, govern the country (choosing its policies, laws and other actions), and both transform the country as you see fit, while trying to retain enough popularity to get re-elected...

Built on a custom-built neural network designed to model the opinions, beliefs, thoughts and biases of thousands of virtual citizens, Democracy 4 is the state-of-the-art in political simulation games. A whole new vector-graphics engine gives the game a more adaptable, cleaner user interface, and the fourth in the series builds on the past while adding a host of new features such as media reports, coalition governments, emergency powers, three-party systems and a more sophisticated simulation that handles inflation, corruption and modern policy ideas such as quantitative easing, helicopter money, universal basic income and policies to cover current political topics such as police body cameras, transgender rights and tons more.

Democracy 4 is the ultimate sandbox for testing out your political ideas. We all think our politicians are useless and that we could do a better job ourselves, but is that really true? With one eye on the budget, one-eye on the polls, and somehow finding time to watch out for terrorist attacks at the same time, you will find that staying in power while changing society for the better is a tougher job than you ever imagined.

Would it really be a good idea to legalize all drugs? to give the police machineguns? to ban abortion? to invest heavily in green energy? would UBI really work? can you stay elected after cutting pensions in half to pay for your science budget? There is only one game that lets you find out!

The intention in designing this game is to have no implied bias whatsoever (tricky, but we try!) so this is NOT a game that is going to lecture you about politics, or tell you that your beliefs are wrong. This is a strategy game, not a political protest :D. If you want to turn your country into ayn rand's fantasy, abolish all public spending and all taxes, you can do that. it might work, it might not! depending on how you handle it. On the other hand if you want to nationalise the railways, the energy companies, the water companies, cap CEO pay, ban second-home ownership and put universal income in place, you can do that too. All the game tries to do is model the *likely* effects, short and long term of any action you take.

Because modders have so enthusiastically supported earlier games in the series, we are doing our bet to make Democracy 4 as mod-friendly as possible too, and steam workshop support will make choosing and installing mods easy. Ultimately all our data is in text files that you can edit yourself, so if you think our analysis of the link between car tax and car usage is wrong (for example), its trivial to edit it, and share your changes with other players.

Ultimately Democracy 4 is not a game about simply winning an election, but about running the country. Losing an election is just the end-game (unless you get assassinated), the real challenge to the game is whether or not you can create a country you are honestly proud of. I hope you enjoy trying 😀

Read more:
Democracy 4 on Steam

Democracy in the age of distrust – The San Diego Union-Tribune

As trust in American institutions declines, citizens must consider new ways to effect change, three academics said in a panel discussion on Democracy of All Thursday night.

The conversation was one of a series of Zoom events presented by University of San Diegos Joan B. Kroc School of Peace Studies. Moderated by San Diego Union-Tribune Publisher and Editor-in-Chief Jeff Light, the panel considered how to solve the big problems facing democracy.

If you polled the American populace in the mid-1960s, three out of four of Americans will say they trust the government, said Ethan Zuckerman, an associate professor of public policy communication and information at University of Massachusetts Amherst. If you poll Americans now, fewer than one in five will tell you they trust the government.

That mistrust, which took root starting in the 1970s, extends to other major institutions, such as universities, newspapers, churches and corporations, with the exception of the military, he said. Students who are anxious about the future and eager to improve their world are losing hope about their ability to do so through established channels, such as voting and organizing, he said.

At a moment while it feels like all our institutions are failing us, going to students and saying, Its fine, organize for a candidate and vote, even go out in the streets and protest, and maybe youll persuade your political leaders to behave somewhat differently, those promises ring somewhat hollow, he said.

Graduate student and activist Nikayla Jefferson described her dismay at seeing Californias environment eroding amid climate change.

Ive lived in California my whole life, and over the past 24 years, how this state has transformed for the worst, said Jefferson, a writer with the Sunrise Movement. The wildfire and the droughts and the sea level rise. Im a backpacker, and high Sierras feel like a second home to me, and every time I leave I wonder will I be able to come back. The climate crisis is deeply, deeply personal to me.

That crisis is intertwined with threats to civil rights, Jefferson said. She described a drive home from a backpacking trip amid wildfires and observing orange skies, ash falling like rain on my windshield, but also being absolutely terrified of being pulled over by the Highway Patrol, because Im brown, and I have curly hair.

She said she became committed to organizing after concluding that by the time she finished a Ph.D. in environmental policy years from now, there would be little left of the environment to save.

The perception of failing institutions amid a tumultuous period should be placed in perspective, however, said Patricia Mrquez, dean of the Joan B. Kroc School of Peace Studies at the USD. Unlike her native Venezuela, which she described as a true failed state, many parts of American democracy and government still function as expected.

There are still a lot of things that work, and its important we dont lose faith, and leverage those things to create trust, Mrquez said. It felt like the election last year was a very scary moment. And Jan. 6, that was a wakeup call that something needs to change, and its still very fragile. I know theres voter suppression, but theres still a lot that works.

Zuckerman said he sees an upside to the cynicism; as Americans have become discouraged by the potential for change through legislative means, they have harnessed economic and technical forces to shift social norms and business practices. He cited the MeToo# movement as a groundswell that shone a spotlight on sexual harassment, forcing workplaces that were complacent about the problem to do better.

Trying to make change through technology and markets can be immensely powerful, he said.

More here:
Democracy in the age of distrust - The San Diego Union-Tribune

US sinks to new low in rankings of world’s democracies – The Guardian

The US has fallen to a new low in a global ranking of political rights and civil liberties, a drop fueled by unequal treatment of minority groups, damaging influence of money in politics, and increased polarization, according to a new report by Freedom House, a democracy watchdog group.

The US earned 83 out of 100 possible points this year in Freedom Houses annual rankings of freedoms around the world, an 11-point drop from its ranking of 94 a decade ago. The USs new ranking places it on par with countries like Panama, Romania and Croatia and behind countries such as Argentina and Mongolia. It lagged far behind countries like the United Kingdom (93), Chile (93), Costa Rica (91) and Slovakia (90).

Sign up for the Guardian's Fight to Vote newsletter

Dropping 11 points is unusual, especially for an established democracy, because they tend to be more stable in our scores, Sarah Repucci, Freedom Houses vice-president for research and analysis, told the Guardian. Its significant for Americans and its significant for the world, because the United States is such a prominent, visible democracy, one that is looked to for so many reasons.

While Freedom House has long included the US in its global ranking of freedoms, it traditionally has not turned an eye inward and focused on US democracy. But this year, Repucci authored an extensive report doing just that, a move motivated by increasing concern over attacks on freedoms in the US.

The report details the inequities that minority groups, especially Black people and Native Americans face when it comes to the criminal justice system and voting. It also illustrates that public trust in government has been damaged by the way rich Americans can use their money to exert outsize influence on American politics.

And it points out that extreme partisan gerrymandering the manipulation of electoral district lines to boost one party over the other has contributed to dramatic polarization in the US, threatening its democratic foundations. Gerrymandering, the report says, has the most corrosive and radicalizing effect on US politics.

Were really concerned about these longer-term challenges that arent going to be addressed with quick fixes, that were kind of highlighted during the Trump administration and, in some cases, taken advantage of, by that administration. Repucci said. A change of president is not gonna make them go away.

The report offers three recommendations for improving American democracy: removing barriers to voting, limiting the influence of money in politics, and establishing independent redistricting commissions. Democrats in Washington are pushing all three of those reforms as part of a sweeping voting package currently under consideration in the US Senate.

Americans should see it as a wake-up call, Repucci said. American democracy is still strong and we still have a lot going for us especially in the strength of our institutions and in the mobilization that is possible among the population. I do think that these problems can be solved and people should take heart in that.

See the original post:
US sinks to new low in rankings of world's democracies - The Guardian

US democracy on the brink: Republicans wage ‘coordinated onslaught’ on voting rights – The Guardian

Sign up for the Guardians Fight to Vote newsletter

Twenty twenty-one should have been a year to celebrate for LaTosha Brown.

After decades of organizing Black voters in Georgia, Brown and other organizers in Georgia broke through. Defying expectations, turnout among Black voters surged in US Senate runoff races, powering two Democrats to historic victories. It came two months after Georgia saw record turnout in its November election, helping Joe Biden become the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry the state in nearly three decades.

This success story was mirrored across America. Despite a lethal pandemic, a staggering 159m votes were cast, 67% of eligible voters, the highest turnout in a presidential election since 1900. Such turnout is even more remarkable considering that millions of Americans adopted an entirely new way of voting, casting their ballots not on election day but ahead of time, either in person or by mail.

There wasnt a meltdown in the election process that many feared early on in the pandemic. The United States Postal Service, under attack from Trump and his allies, delivered ballots on time. Officials found no evidence of widespread fraud or malfeasance during the election. By the time they declared the 2020 election the most secure in American history, a larger truth was apparent: democracy had prevailed.

But 2021 has been far from a celebration of democracy. Its been the opposite American democracy is under attack.

Seizing on Donald Trumps lies about fraud in the 2020 election, Republicans have launched a brazen attack on voting, part of an effort to entrench control over a rapidly changing electorate by changing the rules of democracy. As of mid-February, 253 bills were pending to restrict voting in 43 states. Many of those restrictions take direct aim at mail-in and early voting, the very policies that led to Novembers record turnout.

The fragility of democracy has been exposed at levels that I think even white America was blind to, said Brown, a co-founder of Black Voters Matter.

Republicans have openly talked about their intentions. Everybody shouldnt be voting, John Kavanagh, a Republican in the Arizona state legislature, told CNN earlier this month. Quantity is important, but we have to look at the quality of votes, as well.

Some Republicans say that their efforts to put new voting restrictions in place are part of an effort to restore confidence in elections and prevent voter fraud, which is extremely rare.

But others have shown that their motivation is anti-democratic. Trump dismissed proposals to make it easier to vote last year by saying: Youd never have a Republican elected in this country again. And this month, Michael Carvin, a lawyer representing the Arizona Republican party, said something similar when Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked him what interest the party had in defending two Arizona voting restrictions. Lifting those restrictions, Carvin said, puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats. Politics is a zero-sum game.

More danger lies ahead. Later this year, Republicans in many states will redraw electoral districts for both congressional and state legislative offices across the country, something the constitution mandates once per decade. This will give Republicans an opportunity to pack GOP-friendly voters into certain districts while spreading Democratic voters thin across others, further distorting democracy and ensuring their re-election.

And all of this comes at a moment when the US supreme court appears wholly uninterested in protecting voting rights. The increasingly conservative supreme court has signaled in recent years that it is not going to stand in the way of lawmakers who make it harder to vote, issuing significant decisions that gutted the Voting Rights Act while also giving the green light to aggressive voter purging and extreme partisan redistricting.

Civil rights advocates have described it as the greatest effort to restrict the vote since the Jim Crow era.

The coordinated onslaught of voter suppression bills is not the norm, Stacey Abrams, the former Georgia gubernatorial candidate widely credited with helping flip the state, told the Guardian. What is so notable about this moment, and so disconcerting, is that they are not hiding. There is no attempt to pretend that the intention is not to restrict votes.

They are responding to the big lie, to the disproven, discredited, the blood-spilled lie of voter fraud, she added. They are responding by conforming to a lie and cloaking it in this mask that this is somehow ethical, that this is somehow about protecting, when it is about restricting and suppressing.

In Washington, Democrats are trying to counter the anti-democratic tide by pushing legislation that would amount to the largest expansion of voting rights since the civil rights movement. It is a once in a generation moment a tipping point for America. The result of that fight will determine whether or not the guardrails of Americans democracy hold or whether they come off entirely.

Georgia has emerged as the center of this battle over American democracy. Joe Biden won the state in November by around 12,000 votes after a record number of people cast their ballots through the mail, and Trumps efforts to overturn the election by claiming fraud and squeezing local election officials ultimately proved unsuccessful.

But Republicans in the state legislature are capitalizing on the uncertainty driven by Trumps false allegations and using it to justify aggressive new restrictions on the right to vote.

One measure would allow for any citizen to bring unlimited challenges against another voters qualification, a procedure that has been used to target Black voters in the past in the state. And even though there was no evidence of absentee ballot fraud, Republicans have lined up behind a proposal that would impose additional ID document requirements on voters who cast a mail-in ballot, creating a new hurdle for the poor, minorities and the elderly who face significant challenges in obtaining ID.

Another provision even bans providing food or water to people standing in line to vote after voters, especially in Black neighborhoods in Atlanta, spent hours waiting to cast a ballot last year.

Were in this hamster wheel of doing the work to register to vote. People exercise their vote, particularly Black voters, and then theyre punished for exercising that vote, Brown said. When Black people exercise our right to vote, there is some kind of punitive measure that is inflicted upon our community.

If the bills pass, Georgias going to send a message loud and clear that they dont believe in democracy. That this is a state thats still rooted in its racist, anti-democratic past, she added.

Amid strong pressure from civil rights groups, Republicans in the state have backed away in recent days from some of their most extreme proposals cutting Sunday early voting in the state as well as requiring voters to give an excuse to vote by mail. Both measures would have disproportionately affected Black voters, according to a Brennan Center analysis.

Still, the proposals that remain in the bill would significantly harm Black voters, said Lauren Groh-Wargo, the chief executive of Fair Fight Action, the voting rights group Abrams founded.

This is Jim Crow 2.0. Those who think thats hyperbolic need to read this bill, she said. This is not some sort of moderate consensus because weekend voting is back on the table.

Outside Georgia, Republicans are pushing equally aggressive proposals.

In Arizona, Republicans are advancing an effort to essentially do away with a policy that allows voters to permanently sign up to automatically receive a mail-in ballot. In Florida, Republicans want to ban absentee ballot drop boxes. Texas is entertaining a suite of proposals to make it harder to vote. In Iowa, a state Trump won handily in 2020, Republicans recently enacted a law requiring the polls to close an hour earlier and shortening the early voting period by nine days, from 29 days to 20.

Many of the voting policies being rolled back have been in place for years and were relatively uncontroversial, said Myrna Prez, director of the voting rights and democracy program at the Brennan Center for Justice, which closely tracks voting restrictions in state legislatures. But after an election in which minority voters started to employ them as Republicans long had, access has come under attack.

It was only until communities of color started closing the gap between who was using them that all of a sudden they become political, Prez said.

Many of the measures that ultimately pass will be challenged by voting rights groups in state and federal courts. But those challenges are likely to meet skepticism from a conservative judiciary, molded by Trump, and a US supreme court that appears unwilling to stop lawmakers who make it harder to vote. During the 2020 election, federal appeals courts and the supreme court turned away numerous challenges to expand voting access.

The supreme courts anti-voter posture has become increasingly clear in recent years. In a landmark 2013 case, Shelby County v Holder, the court struck down a provision in the 1965 Voting Rights Act that required places with a history of voting discrimination to submit voting changes to the justice department before they went into effect.

Things have changed dramatically since 1965, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority. It meant that states like Arizona, Georgia and Texas all states considering significant voting restrictions now are no longer required to submit voting changes to the federal government for pre-clearance before they go into effect.

The supreme courts hostility to voting matters has only grown since then. In 2018, the court said Ohio could aggressively remove people from the states voter rolls, opening the door for other states to pursue similar policies. The court could go even further this year it is poised to weaken a key provision of the Voting Rights Act that is one of the most powerful tools groups have to challenge discriminatory laws.

They have made it harder for plaintiffs to establish that voting laws are illegal when they result in greater burdens on voters of color, said Leah Litman, a law professor at the University of Michigan. It has largely made it more difficult across the board, through any medium, to address these state voting laws.

In a true democratic system, one of the strongest checks on the wave of voting restrictions advancing through state legislatures would be voters themselves, who can use the power of the ballot to foment political change. But this year, Republicans will have the power to redraw the blueprints of the electoral system itself in their favor.

The US constitution mandates that state lawmakers redraw electoral districts every 10 years. The process requires politicians to decide which voters belong in which district. Politicians can manipulate it by packing their own voters into certain districts and cracking support for their opponent by scattering their voters across the state.

Republicans will wield enormous influence over this process this year. Despite losing the presidency and the US Senate in 2020, Republicans were successful in retaining power in state legislatures, giving them complete control over drawing 181 congressional districts in 18 states, an advantage they can use to wipe out the Democratic majority in the US House.

A decade ago, Republicans launched a coordinated effort, Project Redmap, to win control of state legislatures. Their aim was to take control of the process of redrawing district lines, which the US constitution mandates state legislatures must undertake once per decade.

The Republican plan paid off tremendously. In 2011, they used new majorities in state legislative cycles to draw favorable maps in swing states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and North Carolina. Those maps ensure that Republicans maintained significant majorities in those states, no matter what happened in regular elections.

While both Democrats and Republicans have engaged in the practice over the years, the Republican effort in 2011 took it to a new level. David Daley, a journalist who extensively chronicled Redmap, has described it as the most audacious political heist of modern times.

Now, the supreme court has made it nearly impossible to legally challenge the tactic in federal court.

In one recent case, the court said Texas lawmakers were entitled to presumption of legislative good faith when it upheld electoral maps a lower court said were discriminatory.

And in 2019, the justices said federal courts could not do anything to stop severe partisan redistricting known as gerrymandering even when lawmakers openly admit they are manipulating district lines for partisan gain. The decision essentially allows lawmakers to slice up voters into different districts to suit their own interests.

The practice has debased and dishonored American democracy, Justice Elena Kagan, wrote in a searing dissenting opinion to the 2019 case. Left unchecked, she wrote, such partisan gerrymandering may irreparably damage our system of government.

When Republicans draw new maps later this year, they will reap the benefits of an unchecked system.

This time around, Republicans will also have more advanced technology and data, allowing them to choose maps from thousands of options with detailed data about voters, said Michael Li, a redistricting expert at the Brennan Center. Because of delays with the 2020 census, which produces the data used for redistricting, states are going to undertake the process much later than usual, a move that may allow them to provide little transparency into the mapmaking process.

The delays will also provide an even shorter window between the redistricting process and the start of the election cycle, giving voting rights groups little time to bring challenges to gerrymandered maps.

States will not have to get their maps reviewed for racial discrimination before they go into effect.

Last decade Republicans tried to pack Black voters into districts in the south and claim that they were trying to do it because of the [Voting Rights Act]. Now theres an open route for [Republicans] to say, well were putting Black voters into districts because theyre Democrats. And the supreme court has said thats OK, Li said.

The reality is that people of color will bear the brunt there because you really cant do a partisan gerrymander in the south without targeting communities of color, he added.

Amid this attack on voting rights, Democrats and voting rights groups see a glimmer of hope in Washington. Earlier this month, Democrats passed a bill that would implement sweeping changes to Americas voting system, requiring states to offer early voting as well as same-day, online and automatic voter registration, among other measures. It would also establish independent commissions to handle redistricting.

A separate bill pending in the House would establish a new formula to require certain states with recent voting rights violations to again pre-clear their voting changes with the federal government.

Making both bills the law will require getting rid of a rule, often referred to as the filibuster, that requires 60 votes to advance legislation. Even though Democrats control the US Senate, there isnt yet enough support for getting rid of the filibuster. Some moderate Democrats have staunchly resisted the idea, saying it will empower the majority party to ram bills through without achieving any kind of consensus.

But the efforts to restrict voting rights have only emboldened Democrats calling to scrap the rule. Not doing so, they say, would have perilous consequences.

Abrams said the measures were essential so that the US does not suffer another 100 years of Jim Crow.

Rather than 100 years of stasis and paralysis and ignominy, this is an opportunity for us to get it right, she said.

Continue reading here:
US democracy on the brink: Republicans wage 'coordinated onslaught' on voting rights - The Guardian