EU Elections and a few problems in the system

[alhoon]

EU elections are coming at 25th May. We get to elect 750 MPs.
Each country more or less gets 6 to 96 MPs depending on population, but not linearly, in order to prevent countries with large populations to completely outnumber countries with smaller populations.

Some problems I see:
1. When they say "depending on population" it's defined as "residents" and not "citizens". I.e. a country with 1 million immigrants counts as 1 million more.

2. Colonies: France's colonies have a couple of million people. UK's colonies have 250K people. Some of the colonies can vote, some cannot.
Gibraltar is obviously OK since it's in Europe. But for example Guadelupe's 1/2 million people are waaaaay too far from Europe and yet, they get to vote.
On the other hand, I don't know (and I would like to know) if the population of the oversea territories counts in the population of the country. I guess it depends on whether they are considered territories of the country or "collectives" like French Polynesia.

Still... France is listed as having 65M residents and UK as having 64M residents.

3. To me at least, there's seems to be a problem with the seats, in favor of Germany.
According to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apporti...2014_Amendment

While Germany is larger than UK, France and Spain, they need less citizens for each MP!
If the Germans (~15 million more than #2 France) had 1 MP/ 900K people, they would have 89MPs instead of 96. Even if they went with the same ratio as #2 ( 1MP/886K) they would have 91 MPs.
Does anyone know why they get more MPs / million citizens although they're so large?

4. Of course, another problem I see is that these elections will probably see the "European National Front" get a couple of MPs. And those MPs will be from the violent, Golden Dawn party.

[Dromikaites]

People in Guadeloupe or New Caledonia (even further away from Europe) are French citizens and live under the same laws as the French. They even send MPs to the French Parliament. So what exactly is wrong with them voting for EU MPs?

[alhoon]

People in Guadeloupe or New Caledonia (even further away from Europe) are French citizens and live under the same laws as the French. They even send MPs to the French Parliament. So what exactly is wrong with them voting for EU MPs?

Since as you mentioned they live under the same laws of EU, then yes, it's OK if they vote.
That of course brings the problem that some of them vote for EU and some don't depending on the status. French Polynesia for example (according to Wikipedia) doesn't use the Euro nor votes for EU.

I see the EU as being relatively self serving to its own ambitions and concerns about the state it wishes to build and the democratic element as being somewhat farcical.

Being "relatively self serving" doesn't preclude the democratic element. May I ask why you consider it farcical? The point of this thread is to actually discuss such things.

[Denny Crane!]

Ignoring the overseas territories aspect where as Drom points out they live under the laws, regulations and rely on subsidisation from those countries usually for their existence (no taxation or apparently aid without representation) then it is correct for them to have a vote; there are some legitimate concerns in that post. I'll be honest though amidst all the possible problems with the EU I am not overly concerned about a few minor irregularities in the voting process. I see the EU as being relatively self serving to its own ambitions and concerns about the state it wishes to build and the democratic element as being somewhat farcical.

[Mangalore]

The current voting distribution is a treaty negotiation by the EU Council so there is political haggling in there. Key issue was to intentionally overrepresent the smaller states while giving the bigger states better representation. End result none is happy. The European parliament apparently has started an initiative putting the distribution of MEPs on an objective basis but obviously voting laws are a cumbersome political agenda as none wants to lose votes.

[SorelusImperion]

It is only fair that an EU citizen can participate in the elections regardless of wether he is currently living in his home country or in another EU member. We don't limit people to electing representatives within the electoral district they were born within in national elections either. Why should a Frenchman living in Germany or a Greek living in France not be allowed to participate in the elections ?

[Knight of Heaven]

"few" Problems haha. And the farse continues, and it doesnt matter who i vote for, the major central parties defend the same thing regarding Europe. The others are Euro skeptics or on those lines, or very small parties in the fringe of the system.
I think Denny pretty much resumes the jest of it.
I might vote as a "protest" vote if you wil. Allthough these elections dont realy matter much.

[Dromikaites]

The fundamental shortcoming of the current EU Parliament elections is the EU Parliament isn't the parliament of a federal state, like the US Congress + Senate are.

Until the EU becomes the United States of Europe voters would have little interest in the EU elections because they [wrongly] think that what happens in the EU Parliament doesn't impact them.

[Adar]

The fundamental shortcoming of the current EU Parliament elections is the EU Parliament isn't the parliament of a federal state, like the US Congress + Senate are.

Until the EU becomes the United States of Europe voters would have little interest in the EU elections because they [wrongly] think that what happens in the EU Parliament doesn't impact them.

In the US around 38 % of the voting age population vote in the congressional elections.

So I do not think it is appropriate to fix a non-functional system by giving the non-functional parts more power in an effort to emulate another non-functional system. Personally I would rather see an EU which seriously commit to the subsidarity principle written in the treaty.

[Dromikaites]

In the US around 38 % of the voting age population vote in the congressional elections.

True. In the same time the EU MPs are largely disconnected from their voters. They can't even get into pork barrel schemes. It makes little sense to "write to your EU MP" because that MP can't do much for you on the short term.

I am far from supporting the idea that the EU MPs should be allowed to pour EU money into their districts. What I am saying is that since the activity of the EU MPs is practically invisible to their constituents, those constituents don't pay too much attention to the elections.

So I do not think it is appropriate to fix a non-functional system by giving the non-functional parts more power in an effort to emulate another non-functional system. Personally I would rather see an EU which seriously commit to the subsidarity principle written in the treaty.

Getting the Parliament to vote a EU government in office (and having an EU government to begin with) might go a long way in making the EU MPs more important in the eyes of the voters.

But of course that would mean the individual states would not handle things like the foreign policies anymore, that there would be a common EU policy in matter like defense, taxation and energy, etc.

We are close to getting a common EU energy policy and something like a common EU financial policy. There is nothing like a common EU foreign policy nor a common EU defense policy yet.

The principle of subsidiarity is a good idea and when fully implemented I think it would make the citizens less paranoid about "losing sovereignty" by handing over the defense and the foreign relations to a EU government.

[Adar]

We are close to getting a common EU energy policy and something like a common EU financial policy. There is nothing like a common EU foreign policy nor a common EU defense policy yet.

The principle of subsidiarity is a good idea and when fully implemented I think it would make the citizens less paranoid about "losing sovereignty" by handing over the defense and the foreign relations to a EU government.

That would just give people a brain haemorrhage. Just look at the Libyan civil war where Germany refused to intervene.

Either you would stall the entire war as they block the intervention. Or you could find yourself in a situation where France and Britain pushes EU into the war and then we get someone like Hollande elected into power which could throw the EU into a U-turn regarding the war and a retreat from the intervention.

Meanwhile we have Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands just going WTF just happened? But without any real power to do anything else than starting to hate the EU.

[Dromikaites]

That would just give people a brain haemorrhage. Just look at the Libyan civil war where Germany refused to intervene.

Either you would stall the entire war as they block the intervention. Or you could find yourself in a situation where France and Britain pushes EU into the war and then we get someone like Hollande elected into power which could throw the EU into a U-turn regarding the war and a retreat from the intervention.

Meanwhile we have Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands just going WTF just happened? But without any real power to do anything else than starting to hate the EU.

Your example with the Libyan intervention is perfect to illustrate why the EU needs to build other mechanisms.

When the US intervened in Iraq it wasn't like Oklahoma and Maine were supporting it. New Mexico stalled while Rhode Island and Texas were asking themselves WTF just happened?

And that is because the US is a federal country where the government and the parliament are the result of the citizens' vote. The citizens vote for the president, the president forms the government, the parliament (Congress) makes the laws under which the government functions, allocate the money the government uses and approves the treaties the government wants to enter into.

When voting for a president or when sending people to the Congress and the Senate, the Americans vote on the same issues irrespective of the state they are in, because the candidates are proposed by "trans-state" parties.

In the EU the citizens vote for the parliament and, in some of the countries, also for the president. However the "government of the EU" (the European Commission and the Council of Ministers are together the closest thing to a EU government) is not the result of all the choices the EU citizens had made on the same issues.

We don't have yet transnational parties in the EU, so each party runs on a national platform. And since currently each country still makes her own decisions about defense and foreign policy, such topics are still part of the national platforms. When those members of the local governments end up in the European Council they cannot easily disentangle the national priorities from the EU priorities.

If on the other hand the defense and foreign policies would be decided only at EU level, by people elected locally especially for that purpose, the issue would be solved.

I mean, right now each county/province/region within the country has some locally elected politicians who basically deal with how the taxpayers' money are spent locally and have no saying in the country's foreign policy or defense or even in making the country's laws.

Those special topics are handled by people elected especially for that, and who in turn aren't expected to decide if village X should build a local community gym or a bridge over a rivulet.

This is why I said that if the subsidiarity principle is fully implemented it would be much easier to separate things like the foreign policy from things like maintaining the law and order or providing health services.

[Condottiere 40K]

Or if they do, they tend to want to throw a spanner in the works.

[Knight of Heaven]

Until the EU becomes the United States of Europe voters would have little interest in the EU elections because they [wrongly] think that what happens in the EU Parliament doesn't impact them.

Oh it does impact, more then ever actualy, and thats the major problem.
But i think the parties are at fault here, the main themes in electoral campaings for european elections, arent european themes, but national ones, and always have been the case.
Unfortunaly, our political scene is a kind of virtual reality, where europe was always a sub-theme for years, not by lack of positions, or thinking heads, but because this dynamic is restrained by real politic and the consensual decision coming from EU.
As Denny well put it EU is quite self serving to its own ambitions and concerns about the state it wishes to build, and we are victims of it( in the sense this politics impact us) and colaborators.

[Mangalore]

Oh it does impact, more then ever actualy, and thats the major problem.
But i think the parties are at fault here, the main themes in electoral campaings for european elections, arent european themes, but national ones, and always have been the case.
Unfortunaly, our political scene is a kind of virtual reality, where europe was always a sub-theme for years, not by lack of positions, or thinking heads, but because this dynamic is restrained by real politic and the consensual decision coming from EU.
As Denny well put it EU is quite self serving to its own ambitions and concerns about the state it wishes to build, and we are victims of it( in the sense this politics impact us) and colaborators.

The typical fun. I don't get the self serving ambitious argument. The national governments are the main power of the EU but somehow the EU is self serving ... It's the national governments that prevent the empowerment of the EU parliament because then they would have a control instance challenging their decision making and they like to be the _only_ decision makers. The EU parliament is ambitious because in their current role they can not properly control or enforce democratic oversight over the EU commission (which is controlled by the EU Council aka national governments and follows their directives) or the EU Council itself. It's a quite natural approach to address these issues.

It's indeed the detachment of the national governments and politics that is the root problem since that argues that the EU parliament shall not have any powers but at the same time abuse the EU level as a less controlled zone to push their agenda through as well as a punching bag to put all the blame on someone else so they don't have to represent their ideas themselves.

[Knight of Heaven]

on someone else so they don't have to represent their ideas themselves.

Exception is when they do represent their ideias, and even want to go beyond those ideias... At least in the Portuguese case, is such a case, then again we are more of a protectorate then anything else.
Thats why i said, Victims, and colaborators at same time.

The national governments are the main power of the EU but somehow the EU is self serving

Precisely. what you realy think the EU is? a Federation? no it isnt.

[Ludicus]

Precisely. what you realy think the EU is? a Federation? no it isnt.

Indeed. Merckel has big plans of her own for the European Commission. Btw, from the news- without comments,
Merkel promised to give me Commission presidency if EPP ...

And a British Poll,
Poll: 1 in 5 Brits think Angela Merkel is European ... - Breitbart

------
Mangalore

The national governments are the main power of the EU

You must be joking

[Sebidee]

Here in Ireland people don't really pay attention to the EU elections. We don't think it makes much of a difference. Its usually just a pre-retirement job for politicians or else just power plays between domestic political parties so that the have some numbers for the next general elections that say they are on top.

Besides, the EU parliment doesn't actually have any power. I have studied a lot of EU law as part of my university degree. People tend to mistakenly believe that the EU functions in the same way as a country with the Parliament as the strongest arm of government. The EU actually works more off the executive with the European Commision and Councils of Ministers having much bigger roles. The parliament only has a small legislative role to review decisions of the commision. I would argue that even the ECJ (EU court) has more power over member states than the parliament and even so it is considered lesser than most Supreme Courts.

[Sebidee]

And in answer to the OP's number one point about the difference between residents and citizens, I am pretty sure residents are EU citizens living in another country and not third country citizens. They certainly should have the right to vote

[Condottiere 40K]

You have basically two organizations, the economic EU dominated by a germane Germany and a floundering France, and the neglected NATO led by an anemic America.