7 Nicola Porro wrote Thursday in his comment on The Journal , noting that the opposition is not the problem in reality, the electoral law, but Berlusconi, and as he himself is the target of the whole 'operation: "The current electoral law is clearly crap. As said by many it was the old one the Matarellum. And as it was obviously that the Italians have canceled due to the referendum with pitchforks Mario Segni. Electoral laws in Italy are like clothes tailor with the passage of time become narrow, inadequate. If you do not want to take the piss there is only one system, very subjective to define a good electoral law in Italy: those are good rules of the game that allow us to play. The point is that every player has his own perspective, his grades and its many conveniences. " The point is all. As observed Porro: "From the logical point of view an electoral law is moving in a pendulum between stability and representation. In the midst of hundreds of small technical devices can further the interests of some and the others. "
Porro in his note highlights some issues where it's good to reflect, beginning Italian by the anomaly than the rest of the democratic West and in particular the Anglo-Saxon world. The Deputy Director of the Journal gives a few examples: "In England the Liberals have recently gained a lot of votes, not enough to govern, but necessary to elect a prime minister. No one asked to change the rules of the game: the parties have adjusted to the rules. " Second example: "In the U.S., even the chaos that led to the victory of George W. Bush has led to the modification of the complex electoral system. Nor is the great center requires that the polls stars and stripes to keep growing in day to peaks of 30 percent. " England, America ... but already we are Italians and so it is now all but Silvio Berlusconi and the League, asking the overcoming of the electoral law. Porro says: "The issue has become so vital that it could create an absurd coalition of the willing that you do not know under which sudden force (if not a common dislike for the Cav) to agree on electoral liquid. Furthermore, according to Porro, why throw in the trash "bullshit" of Calderoli are many, the option does not specify by name on the voters who elect the majority of the premium that many question. Remember
Porro in his piece that "the current electoral system has not been made a century ago, but voted exactly the same participants in the Parliament today. A change Mattarellum (the law that arose in the aftermath of the referendum marks) was the Freedom House, which in addition to the League and Forza Italy, had within it the National Alliance and UDC. What changed your mind and representatives Finian Casini if \u200b\u200bnot the fact that it is not now more allied with Berlusconi? "Quite evidently. It adds Porro discovered the sore point of all present and future opposition, "Out of all hypocrisy then we say the truth: we change this ugly election law that we helped to vote in order to reduce the weight of Berlusconi's coalition in the forthcoming elections. A few balls, please . Papal Pope: "The new law will not be better from this perspective, but Berlusconi free, 'says Porro, but what is obvious to every right-thinking in the face of the question as is given now by the opposition and future as such .
Porro finally remembers something that these days you hear just remember: "An attempt to change the porcellum there was: the referendum of Professor Guzzetta. A little 'how to score would have undermined the system of law. Just think 'by Franceschini, then a number of the PD, D'Alema, in Brunetta Prestigiacomo and they all agreed in the referendum. That shifted the majority of the premium to the party the most votes and eliminate multiple applications. Yet only 25 percent of Italians went to vote, a percentage so low as to break the outcome of the consultation. " Another ball is often heard from those who would back the people with pitchforks in the streets is so revealed. Porro notes: "Even out here in hypocrisy. Today, if someone says that the issue of electoral law is the fundamental theme heard and feel of the country must be four calculations with very little enthusiasm, with which the referendum was held only a couple of years ago. " Well, around there are those who consciously lies propaganda lies and confident the diversion of Italian militants and blind and deaf to all reason.
Regulating electoral means to decide on a set of rules that may be based on multiple solutions, which can range from encouraging the highest proportional representation with perfect focus on the maximum stability with the majority of the premium. We must, however, deal with reality. He says at the conclusion of his commentary Porro: "It's hard to think that a parliament by Fini D'Alema will be able to agree on the details of the rules." Yeah, and it is also clear that "one thing they can agree: how to get out of Berlusconi." So? "But let's not say so, and then for a ride." Good call, but unfortunately not the intellectual honesty is a commodity which has a market today.
0 comments:
Post a Comment