EC's reform plans seem naive, detrimental to democracy

[Balance]

Of all the proposals discussed in this article, the most asinine is the one that will allow the EC veto power over legislation passed in Parliament deemed to be 'populist and damaging to the nation'. First, why should they have the power to oversee parliament? Two, this whole concept is so nebulous it will only serve to frustrate political parties who want to make meaningful reforms only to have them labeled 'populist' by those opposing them. You can address these issues in much more rational ways like demanding a balanced budget or cap borrowing at a certain amount.

The other big issue that bothers me is the current concept of 'collective' responsibility placed on political parties because of the improper behavior of individuals affiliated with that party. That is, a whole party can be dissolved because of the illegal actions of one individual. If this same concept was applied to western democracies, there would be no political parties.

If reform is to be made, then power and purpose given to the independent agencies must be reformed as well. Basically, they are not accountable to anyone.

The concept of "collective responsibility" cuts through all of Thailand. If everyone is responsible, then no one is responsible and if no one is responsible, then no one is accountable. The coup leaders have a year to fulfill the promise of restoring democracy. If, at the end of this period, they fail or the result is another sham, reaction in the world will make the current world wide negative reaction look very mild indeed. More than the appearance of democratic rule is necessary.

[Emster23]

They tried to impose term limits in various places in USA. While it sounds like a good idea in theory, there are a couple of flaws I can think of. 1. It gives more power to special interests, bureaucrats, lobbyists: they don't have term limits. 2. It implies a distrust in ability of voters to decide who should serve them, er, be in office. Republicans got term limit for President after FDR was elected 4 times. They wish hadn't done that when Reagan was in office. Oh, and 3. Probably takes some time to learn the ropes in office, so perhaps more likely to get "managed" by those special interests