The mixed member proportional electoral formula system includes members elected both from single party members and from party lists. This system combines, or mixes, the proportional results of a list proportional representation system with the representation of a single party member system. Under mixed member proportional representation, voters are able to cast two votes, one for the party candidate of their choice and one for the party of their choice. What does not make sense about the mixed member proportional electoral formula system, such as is implemented in modern Germany, is that by voting for a closed party list, the voter is effectively removed from participating in the direct democratic selection of candidates.
When voters are relegated to participate in mixed member proportional electoral formula systems, they are often cut off from the decision making of who is able to attain a place on the party lists. By having to vote for a party rather than a party member, the voter is merely able to vote for a set of ideas and hope that the party who is supposed to be supporting these ideas will place competent people into the governmental positions. Although mixed member proportional electoral formula systems do foster direct voting of party members to a certain degree, such as the 50 of seats awarded to single party members in Germany, there are still 50 of legislative seats who are chosen from closed party lists and not by voters.
The problem with mixed member proportional electoral formula systems is that they proclaim to be democratic while at the same time prohibiting democracy from taking hold. For example, if in Germany 40 of the people vote for the CDU, 30 for the SPD, and 10 for the Linke, 10 for the FDP, and 10 for the Grne, then the parties get to fill these seats in these proportions for 50 of legislative seats, regardless of how competent or well liked these candidates are. These candidates are chosen by the closed party and not by the public at large, so many people are not at all familiar with 50 of the legislators coming into office. In this kind of system, a fully public and democratic vote for all party members is regarded as dangerous, and only a select group of people, usually upper class members of society, participate in selecting party list members.
The mixed member proportional electoral formula system of Germany was established in 1949 and was regarded as a temporary measure to get the government running again smoothly, although it still remains in practice today. Perhaps voting for a party list was regarded as safer, given the history of extremism in German government, as the allies could perhaps have some influence on who would be able to make it onto the party lists. However, considering the dangerous aspects of lack of democracy, the idea to vote for party lists rather than party members is a step in the direction of oligarchy rather than democracy.
The only way for people to be assured of their direct participation in government is to actually serve as a government official or to vote directly for one who will represent the interests of the voters as well as the party. The most important responsibility of government officials is to mean what they say and do what they say, and voters need to have the final decision about whether or not an official will enter and remain in office. Although parties do provide a general framework within which party members can work, the direct voting of party members by the public is essential to retaining a purely democratic system.
The American Presidential Elections of November 7, 2002 got George W. Bush into his second term in the highest post of the land, but not without the ensuing court rulings that would be landmark decisions in the political history of the United States.
In the hotly contested election, the Democrat standard bearer, Al Gore got 50,999,897 popular votes over Bushs 50,456,002 but the latter was declared winner and subsequently sworn in as the 43rd president of America. The votes in Florida would prove pivotal in the outcome of the election. In an Electoral College system, state legislatures are empowered by the US Constitution to decide on how to choose their electors. Different states have different laws by which to select their electors. In most states, like Florida, candidates with the highest popular votes, which may or may not be a majority, get the electoral votes. Other states like Maine and Nebraska give the electoral votes to the candidates who win the majority, which are 271.
In Florida, Bush got 48.8 of the vote, 0.5 less of the total votes casted. An automated recount was mandated by law. With the recount, Bushs lead decreased. Florida election laws allow candidates to request manual recounts, which Gore did for four counties that traditionally vote for Democrats. On the possibility of uncounted votes by tabulating machines, Gore found it necessary to ask for recounts, the complexity of the election laws in Florida made it easy for Gore. With Bush, he would want to freeze his lead and Florida law that appoints a week after the election as deadline for certifying the vote appears tight enough to gives him the chance.
Gore chose the votes in Volusia, Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade for manual recounting. The four counties agreed to the recount and as required by Florida law had to certify the returns within 7 days after the election to the Florida Secretary of State, which was November 14, but as ruled by the Florida Circuit Court these counties could amend their returns at a later date. However, the Secretary of State was given the discretion to include them in the statewide returns, having considered all pertinent facts and circumstances. All 67 counties were with certified returns by 500pm of November 14, except for Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade. The Secretary would determine if she would accept the late filings based on a set of criteria which she issued to the counties wanting to submit late filings. She required them to justify the late filing with written statements of the facts and circumstances. All four counties submitted statements, but the Secretary found none of them justified the late filing. She announced that as soon as she gets the certified returns of the absentee votes from each county, she would certify the presidential election results on November 26. Bush was certified winner.
On December 8, the Florida Supreme Court ordered a manual recount on the whole state of Florida. The US Supreme Court voting 5-4 stayed the Florida recount. Several legal and moral issues were highlighted. First the issue of stay suggested that petitioner (Bush) has a good chance of success. The question was not so much as whether the votes ordered recounted were legally cast but that the counting of the legally questionable votes may bring irreparable harm to the petitioner by casting doubts on his legitimacy. Dissenting opinion has it that preventing the completion of the recount will cast the cloud of legitimacy.
Judicial restraint on the part of the state supreme court should have been exercised. A branch of the Federal Government has more legal stature to resolve the issue. The Equal Protection Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment was cited to apply only in the current circumstance when in the absence of standards, the ballot is accepted as valid indication of intent of voter and w here dissenting argument said that the law was violated when similar ballots may be accepted in some counties but rejected in others. There was also the matter of the safe harbor provision where states are allowed to appoint their electors within a deadline specified without intervention by Congress.
Bush had 271 votes, 1 vote over the 270 needed to win a presidency in the Electoral College. The 25 electoral votes of Florida handed the victory over to George W. Bush of Texas, defeating Democratic candidate Gore with 266 electoral votes.
Poverty may be viewed as a situation in which some members of a society cannot afford their basic necessities including food, shelter, clothing, education, healthcare and opportunities to work. From this view-point, Africa and Asia are the most poverty-laden continents in the world as they are home to the largest proportions of people with no access to these basic necessities. The truth however, is that there are some very poor people in North America and Europe which have the largest economies. The definition of poverty may however be extended to comparisons between what an individual member of a society earns compared to other members of the society. This is because living standards change with societies, meaning that poverty lines are also applicable to societies. Poverty affects every part of the world and no country can reasonably claim to have subdued poverty completely.
The most common measure of poverty entails the use of an individual s or country s income or consumption. According to the World Bank, individuals are said to be living in poverty if they are earning less than US 1 per day. These people, wherever they live in the world, are noted for their inability to afford their basic necessities.
Income, consumption and the poverty line are not enough to explain the poverty situation of a people. The use of income to measure poverty implies that all a society needs to get out of poverty is to help the poor to rise above the poverty line. The poverty line misleads some people to believe that governments can eradicate or reduce poverty significantly in their countries by using income transfers to their citizenry. This is rather untrue because poverty is not only about income and consumption. It encompasses other facets including social exclusion and capability deprivation which also affect the poor. Relying on only the income to measure poverty thus ignores these important elements, rendering the measure insufficient. Poverty cannot be possibly eliminated unless social exclusion and capability deprivation are dealt with effectively through targeted actions and policies.
Measures of poverty which lean heavily on income also have other shortcomings. Some people, though earning enough to live above the poverty line, lack education, training, and family support systems to provide a stable economic future for their children. It is not difficult to observe that though not classified as poor officially, such people, and their children are very vulnerable. This goes to enforce the arguments that using income and consumption to measure poverty can often lead to misleading findings, and income transfers alone would fall short of eradicating poverty in whichever the country. Any government serious on making significant reductions on poverty must give serious thought to the provision of unbiased and quality education, health services, financial training, and enforcement of labour laws particularly to companies employing unskilled or low-skilled labourers who are more vulnerable to abuse at work.
The 2000 controversial presidential results in the US in which Democratic candidate, the then Vice president Al Gore won the popular vote with 50,999,897 votes against his close opponent Republican governor George W Bushs 50,456,002 yet the latter went on to become the 43rd president of the US exposed the irony of democracy, and more so American democracy, as conceived by our founder-fathers. Suffice to say that by the postulates of the US Constitution, and the allegations of electoral fraud or any other electoral malpractice thereof notwithstanding, George W Bush won the elections but by the dictates of most democratic ideals, Al Gore was supposed to win (or he did win) the elections So why and how come there is this paradox between the desired democratic tradition and the entrenchments in our Constitution The answer lies in the misgivings our-founder fathers had in the common people.
It is imperative to realize that even though common people in the US were granted a lot of discretion to participate in certain activities or enjoy certain liberties or rights that even people in their contemporary democracies such as England never got to enjoy, most citizens of the US still never got to vote on the basis of their not having certain amount of property or by their class, gender or color. Our founder fathers had less belief in the common people.
Our founder fathers, though believers in Republicanism, federalism and other important tenets of a democracy such as freedom of the press and personal liberty, didnt really believe in the capability of the people to make rational decisions. The people, the founder fathers reasoned, were likely to be led by emotional whims and prejudices rather than logic and sobriety. In fact in those days, when absolutism was at its zenith, democracy was associated with mob-rule thanks in large part to Greek philosopher Aristotle. However, it is important to note that the literacy levels during Aristotles time or even during the 18th century were very low compared to todays levels.
In the US presidents are not really elected by the people but electoral colleges. This is the body that elects the president each state is represented by the same number of members as in its congregational delegation. Originally, the members of the Electoral College were selected in the manner prescribed by their legislatures and had some discretion in making their choice. Not anymore. Now the 538 or thereabout members have mainly a pro forma function and each state delegation is bound to vote as a bloc and for the presidential candidate who received a plurality of the state votes. So the electorate still matter after all, at least in most of the elections that have been conducted in the US.
Indeed, the whole logic behind the formation of the Electoral College to elect the commander-in-chief of the US armed forces contravenes the very fundamentals of democracy democracy is rule by the people, or to Abraham Lincolns words-it is the government of the people, by the people and for the people. Of course the people may delegate that authority to govern to certain elected representatives. This does not in any way mean that democracy permits the people to abscond their power. The people, for example, have the ultimate decision to overthrow these officials if they feel that these representatives are not serving them satisfactorily. In fact, if there is an elementary factor in democracy that is never contested is that the people have a right to directly elect their representatives, inclusive of the head of state or government (unless otherwise stated).
During the Democratic nominations that saw Senator Barack Obama (currently president) trounce Senator Hilary Rodham Clinton (currently US secretary of State), Clinton won the popular vote but Obama who got the most delegates went on to become the Democrats presidential candidate in the 2008 presidential elections. Clintons team had at some point protested that Obama by not winning the popular vote had not got the peoples mandate. They reasoned that even if Obama went on to be the partys flag bearer he would be an easy defeat for the Republicans. However Obama went on to capture the presidency by defeating the Republican senator John McCain. What is more interesting is that Obama won the popular vote by such a narrow margin that would it be in a different democracy a re-run would have been called.
Fortunately our tradition has been that generally the candidate with the most popular vote gets to win in a given constituency as the electors align their choice with that of the people. Unfortunately this is not guaranteed in the Constitution, an elector is still free to vote as heshe deems right. Exceptions to this tradition include such instances as the 2000 presidential elections.
Nonetheless, it is many Americans opinion that we should rescind the provision that puts such vital decision making process in the hands of some few individuals. As I have said, Americans are highly informed today, and as such they can always make wise decisions. Indeed, with regard to the controversial 2000 elections, some people have argued that George Bush had such a pathetic legacy because he did not have the peoples blessing. It may or it may not be right, but we have to put the mandate to decide who is to be president on the people and not the Electoral College. It can be right that in the event that an amendment is instituted the Electoral College is retained to affirm the decision as they have been doing it in principle.
Falkland Islands are located in the South Atlantic Ocean that is located at approximately 300 miles from South America and 700 miles from mainland Antarctica and roughly 3,800 miles from Africa. The islands are self governed by a governor and Queen Elizabeth II being the official head of state as the Island is a United Kingdom Overseas Territory. Argentina claimed sovereignty over the islands in the year 1982 leading to a two months combat war between United Kingdom and Argentina forces. Although Argentina was defeated in the war, the United Kingdom failed in its intelligence organization to suppress the occurrence of the war and protect its citizens from the Argentina invasion.
In January 9th 1982, the British Ambassador to Argentina did lodge an official protest against unauthorized entry and landing of Argentina merchant Constantino Davidoff in the island and later according to (Falklands 1983) the businessman introduced a few workers into the Georgia island while in 12th January 1982, the Argentine Joint Armed Forces committee finalizing details on how to attack the island claiming sovereignty. Though in the following month Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher advised on the issue citing sufficient military action to prevent the invasion laxity is seen in the action of the British government to offer talks with Argentina representative Ernesto Ros in New York in February.
In March first, the British and Argentine deputy foreign ministers praised the Sovereignty talks briefly before the Argentina counterpart rejected the communiqu (Falklands 1983) terming it unnecessary so long the United Kingdom stayed put. Consequently, the Argentine government pronounced military action in March 2rd 1982. Poor intelligence co-ordination is further witnessed in the failure of the British government to effectively address MP Julian Amery concerns about the protection of the island from the invasion. To add to that intelligence negligence the Foreign Secretary Lord Carrington snubbed the idea of sending submarine patrol to the Islands and South Georgia in March 5th 1982.
Subsequently the Argentina military airline LADE decisively took over the island by erecting the Argentine flag in blatant disrespect of the British crown leading to war. Though the United Kingdom anticipated war from the Argentina military preparedness there was seen unnecessary British delay some citing unwelcomed military expenditure as the cause of the delay. Conclusively, the United Kingdom intelligence co-ordination relaxed in its pledge to protect its overseas citizens from foreign insurgency.
The economic environment in most African countries has had an almost dramatic shift as the waves of globalization have come sweeping through the continent. Globalization has been responsible for the rampant changes in sectors critical to the economy such as export and import, technology, and manufacturing. In Nigeria, one of Africas leading economic powers and the most populous nation in the continent, the effects that globalization has been able to bring about can best be analyzed by considering the operations of multinational firms there like Shell, and institutions like the World Bank and the IMF. This is what is discussed in this paper, with a focus on the oil sector and the governments policies. There are also conclusions and recommendations that ought to be adopted to improve the situation.
The Concept of Globalization
Essentially, globalization is the transformation of a national and localized economy into an international one by opening up a countrys borders to foreign investments, both direct and indirect, and to allow for the free movement of factors of production including human resources, technology, and free trade (Gbosi 2007). It also entails the formation of trading blocs to enhance regional competitiveness. Economic globalization usually focuses on the integration through aspects like capital flows, direct foreign investment, migration, and trade. On a wider scope, globalization is a concept that might include the international movement of ideas and general cultural aspects of the people.
Globalization in Nigeria
Globalization has improved the oil industry in Nigeria by allowing firms like Shell to drill oil and natural gas, and others to support the country in its development endeavors. As one of the leading exporters of oil and gas and a member of OPEC, Nigeria is a strategic destination for foreign direct investments (Akpotor 2005). The World Bank and the IMF have in the recent past been leading economic reforms in the country, hence the country could do more to benefit from new trading partners and to open up its market for more investments. As a result, the GDP of the country has been fairly improving (West 2003). Nigeria has for a long time failed to convert its huge oil resources into meaningful economic development, making its per capita income one of the lowest. The two institutions are helping the country realize this goal through putting in place viable economic policies that are believed to be capable of bringing about sustainable economic development. Investment in the power supply sector, a key sector of the economy that has often lagged behind, is being given a priority.
The Impact of Globalization on Government Policies in the Business Environment in Nigeria
Owing to the high rate at which the countrys trade with other nations is growing, the policy of the government in Nigeria has been slightly altered to go in line with the current economic trends. There is a lot more focus on international trade with companies like Shell and other Western companies most of which are specialized in the oil sector. On its part, the country has stepped up efforts to allow in countries like China to invest directly in areas of their interest such as power generation.
China has become a leading investment partner in the country (West 2003). That aside, globalization has forced the country to open its borders to more foreign investors. Policies and legislation in the country are designed to favor regional cooperation (Gbosi 2007). As a result, businesses have had a chance to come up. However, there has been an influx of cheap imports that are posing a threat to local industries, and together with embracing the beneficial aspects of globalization, Nigeria is keen to have laws that ensure growth and protection of local industries and businesses.
Impacts of Multinational Companies on Nigerias Economic Development
The economic state of the country has been greatly influenced by its oil players, mainly Shell. This company has been drilling oil and exporting it on behalf of the government. Although multinationals like Shell ought to play a greater role in the development of the country, this has not really been the case as Nigerians continue to lag behind in development in spite of it being the second largest oil exporter in Africa. It seems Shell and the government needs to reconsider their relationship and agreements so that the wealth of the country may proportionally benefit the citizenry.
Conclusion and recommendations
Globalization has been playing a very important role in allowing into the Nigerian market new technologies and goods at a fair price. Owing to the way in which globalization is ushering in new players into the Nigerian Oil industry, there has to be measures to ensure all the income that come from the oil revenue is channeled to benefit all citizens, especially those in the oil-rich areas like the Niger Delta. The IMF, the World Bank, and other partners of the country ought to work with the government to help curb rampant corruption as this will improve the flow of revenue to the intended people. Multinational companies like Shell must do more to ensure the benefits they get from the country are also used to help the locals by initiating development projects for the local people. Since globalization is bound to leap on indefinitely, it is critical, that the government devises ways to formulate policies that will help check the issue of substandard products, and to help its industries grow. Only then will the country be in a position to effectively deal with the effects of globalization.
As the title suggests, the article is concerned with negotiations between international bodies that seek to enter into an international alliance to serve their purposes. The article begins with a brief introduction of why and how international alliance negotiations take place and also points to a couple of the many legal questions that are involved in such negotiations. The primary objective of the article is to provide a basic idea about the procedural matters that are associated with international alliance negotiations and in doing so the article highlights the key aspects and characteristics of such alliances. At the outset, the article presents the starting point of all international alliance negotiations which is the establishment of issues around which the partnership will be formed, or in other words, the issues based on which the parties to the alliance shall begin and conduct their negotiations in order to give shape to the alliance. The second part of the article relates to the various aspects which comprise the establishment of issues. These include, firstly, the setting up of joint ventures, the proposed outline of the contract, performance clauses, restrictions on the partners and liability issues. Secondly comes the post-establishment issues which may include any changes that may take place to the contract, the dispute resolution, disposal and transfer of shares, termination of the contract. Lastly follows the actual negotiation process. Thus the three important facts that the authors use to support the principle idea are - Establishment Issues, Post-Establishment Issues and the Negotiation Process.
The information and ideas discussed in this article which have also been discussed in our textbook are firstly, the issue of joint ventures which is found in Chapter 20, page 616 of the textbook. Secondly, the issue of Strategic Alliances is also found in both and in the textbook inn Chapter 15 on page 454. thirdly, another aspect that finds place in both the article and the book is that of Dispute Resolution which can be found in Chapter 9, page 281 of the textbook.
The article also takes up and discusses some new concepts relating to these negotiations. The article talks about performance clauses. Performance clauses comprise the body of the agreement and deals with the goods and services in the negotiation. The second new concept discussed is liability and force majeure, a part related to liability. Share disposal is another new term which relates to the distribution and possession of shares of the partners that have entered into the alliance. The fourth new concept is that of termination which includes rules with regard to the termination of the alliance. Termination can take place both according to the agreement as well as a breach of the contract by a party to the alliance. Finally, the negotiation process is another new aspect discussed in the article. The negotiation process is concerned with the issues that are to be dealt with, the parties to the negotiation, the legal procedure involved, the choice of lawyers and the roles of the negotiating parties.
