Representation, Bicameralism, Political Equality, and Sortition: Reconstituting the Second Chamber as a Randomly Selected Assembly

被引:53
作者
Abizadeh, Arash [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] McGill Univ, Dept Polit Sci, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[2] McGill Univ, Dept Philosophy, Montreal, PQ, Canada
关键词
TERM LIMITS; DEMOCRACY; ELECTIONS; ABILITY; CORE; LOT;
D O I
10.1017/S1537592719004626
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
The two traditional justifications for bicameralism are that a second legislative chamber serves a legislative-review function (enhancing the quality of legislation) and a balancing function (checking concentrated power and protecting minorities). I furnish here a third justification for bicameralism, with one elected chamber and the second selected by lot, as an institutional compromise between contradictory imperatives facing representative democracy: elections are a mechanism of people's political agency and of accountability, but run counter to political equality and impartiality, and are insufficient for satisfactory responsiveness; sortition is a mechanism for equality and impartiality, and of enhancing responsiveness, but not of people's political agency or of holding representatives accountable. Whereas the two traditional justifications initially grew out of anti-egalitarian premises (about the need for elite wisdom and to protect the elite few against the many), the justification advanced here is grounded in egalitarian premises about the need to protect state institutions from capture by the powerful few and to treat all subjects as political equals. Reflecting the "political" turn in political theory, I embed this general argument within the institutional context of Canadian parliamentary federalism, arguing that Canada's Senate ought to be reconstituted as a randomly selected citizen assembly.
引用
收藏
页码:791 / 806
页数:16
相关论文
共 122 条
[1]  
Achen C., 2016, DEMOCRACY REALISTS
[2]  
Ajzenstat J., 2003, Protecting Canadian Democracy: The Senate You Never Knew
[3]  
ameson richard, 2015, STANFORD ENCY PHILOS
[4]   DEMOCRACY ISN'T THAT SMART (BUT WE CAN MAKE IT SMARTER): ON LANDEMORE'S DEMOCRATIC REASON [J].
Ancell, Aaron .
EPISTEME-A JOURNAL OF INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIAL EPISTEMOLOGY, 2017, 14 (02) :161-175
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1999, DEMOCRACY ACCOUNTABI, DOI DOI 10.1017/CBO9781139175104.002
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1977, COLLECTED WORKS JS M
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2010, DEGREES DEMOCRACY
[8]  
[Anonymous], 1971, THEORY JUSTICE, DOI DOI 10.4159/9780674042605
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2012, DEMOCRATIC REASON
[10]  
[Anonymous], 2009, PEOPLE SPEAK