Sunday, November 28, 2010

Dual-Competitive Government

I just revisited my own idea during sleep. *doh*

This may be a silly idea ("Impossible") or may took many years to implement", here's how it will go...

Warning: This is a Thought Experiment, spare me the laughter... :)

The present Governmental Weakness
  1. The current government (Executive) evaluation process took a long time, 5 years or more to make the leader submit their self-evaluation. It will be to late for change to take place. We need adaptive Government with specific Key Performance Indicator which can be evaluated at any point of time by the House of Representative.

  2. The ruling government once elected was difficult to be changed. Furthermore, some people will become upset if their leader changed before their time is up. We need a system that will Zeroing the unneccessary cost of political change.

  3. There is strong suspicion that after being elected, the Executive in their 2nd to 3rd year of their ruling time will collect fortune for themselves , while in the 4th year busy polishing their record in order to win the next election. We need a system that force them NOT to do this or at least make it difficult.

  4. It's difficult for the Executive member to voice their "official" dissenting opinion/concern that serve as self-reflection and early notification for the House of Representative to embrace a "heads-up" signal when crisis arrived. We need a system that promote self-reflection mechanism without the fear of being fired or marked as rebel.

  5. Some leaders are "Leader in Crisis", typically have strong recovery management, while other "Leaders in Growth", typically have many creative ideas to make new breakthrough. We need a system that facilitate a means for both type of leaders to co-exist.
  6. There are condition where HoR doesn't do what people concerned of, in this case people can do their own "civil disobedience" and therefore crippling some of the KPI which related to a specific Leader governance that they dont like, so it will be switched to other Leader. They dont have to wait for 5 years to do it.

The Implementation

  1. The Presidential Candidate will have to campaign from the beginning stating whether they are favoring in the side of "Growth" or "Crisis", they must to pick only one. (And also their program, target, but that's not what we mainly concerned of right now).

  2. In the election, People will be asked to pick two Presidential Candidate, one from "Growth" and one from "Crisis" (ideally from different party, or different interest, and independent), simply put they will be asked to whom they will be convinient to be lead during Good Time and Bad Time. (I do strongly advocate that not at presidency level but at ministrial level, but I will accept this adjustment for simplification)

  3. Once elected, both of them (Leader in Growth and Leader in Crisis) will be given a "President" status (for a simple reason, that people have elected them), any Institution within the country will treat them as equal. HoR, based on current KPI, will appoint which President will be in charge first. (Is the country in Crisis or in Growth?)

  4. When Leader in Growth is in-charge/active, the Leader in Crisis may not protest anything, their job is simply as an observer (listen and report) and make report to House of Representative about their concern, so that the House of Representative may call the current active President.

  5. Leader in Crisis may not openly criticize, threat, undermine, hinders, remove Leaders in Growth to perform their duties, and vice versa. Such attempt can be considered as Inconstitutional by HoR. Leader in Crisis may only voice their concern to the HoR (request a meeting) and to the masses but it can be done once every several determined months, that if and only if the KPI had an strong indication that may lead toward Crisis. It is HoR job to decide whether to make Press Release or not regarding the meeting content.

  6. Each of them are required to state their KPI (low and high), Programs and Ministers. For example: Leader in Crisis will set their Economic KPI at 1% - 4%, while Leader in Growth will set their KPI at 3% - 6%. The intersect lies within 3%-4% boundaries. The job of House of representative is to set the median value, for example 3%.

  7. Leader in Crisis during "his/her inactive time" is guaranteed of equal access to information for every ministrial report. Every accsss of information is replicated between both Leader, it works like a carbon copy. Ministers must submit their report to both President.

  8. Suppose the economic growth drop to 2%, below the median value (3%), then the Leader in Crisis will automatically takeover the economic responsibilities and the condition #5 is reversed (Leader in Growth will be temporarily discharged/relieved of duty), Leader in Growth may not protest anything. The condition #5 is reversed again if economic growth is above its median value (3%), at 4%.

Interesting Features of this kind of Government

  1. Swift and legal transition in the Executive Body,
  2. It shifted the President power from monopolistic to oligopolistic, so assuming both of them craving for power, it will be a competitive government.

  3. Allow for both conservative and progressive style of government to co-exist.

  4. Different skill-sets is required for different conditions, and we let the people choose what the best for them in Bad or Good Time.

  5. There is disincentive for Executive to not performing well, they will be out of job and power.

  6. Self-Critic/Assesment can be conducted at any point of time without the fear of being fired, left hands know what right hands going to do.

  7. Still maintaining effectivity, because only one decision maker can exist at one time,

  8. Still maintining efficiency, because not all government is replicated, only the Leaders and the reports.

  9. If you think Vice President mechanism is sufficient to replace my proposal, well, I humbly think it is NOT, because VP is being hand-picked as an Aide by President and of course if must follow the President orders and have lesser power. In my type of government, it doesn't work that way.

That would be all I guess,... and ridiculous as it may seems, but since I haven't read it anywhere in the Internet, so I'll named is as "Dual-Competitive Government (DCG) " and I'll claimed it as my idea... :P

No comments:

Post a Comment