Rahul Mehta Gandhinagar LsCandidate
Newspaper advt I will giving to show that Right to Recall MP procedure we have proposed is better than procedure proposed by Varun Gandhiji
.
------------------
.
This is the newspaper advt I will be giving in Indian Express to show that RTR-MP procedure draft we have proposed is better than RTR-MP procedure draft proposed by Sri Varun Gandhiji. Pls take a look, and see if there are error.
.
If anyone can do a complete re-design, he is welcome.
.
The text portion of DRAFT is as follows. The link to PDF is in first comment
.
===============
(advertisement) RRP ( Right to Recall Party to be registered )
.
Why Right to Recall MP procedure proposed by us at RRP is better ;
while RTR-MP proposed by MP Shri Varun Gandhiji is flawed
( and if you support our procedure, then pls tweet “@PmoIndia pls print RTR-MP draft at mygov.in/comment/101390431 #RrpRtrMP “
.
From : Rahul Chimanbhai Mehta, B Tech, Comp Sci, IIT Delhi; MS, Comp Sci, Rutgers Univ, USA; FB link - facebook.com\MehtaRahulC
.
(1) Preface : first of all, we all at RRP sincerely thank MP Sri Varun Gandhiji for presenting a private member bill to enact RTR MP (RTR = Right to Recall). We at RRP are working to bring RTR over PM, CM, MP, judges, District Police Chief, District Education Officer and all nodal officers at Central/State/District levels. After all, most important reasons why USA is ahead of world are laws like – RTR, Jury System, absence of draconian GST, use of Wealth Tax, etc. USA has RTR over District Police Chief, judges, CM, Public Prosecutors etc, and we at RRP intend to bring that in India as well.
.
Now mere label of RTR is useless. Good procedure is must. Flawed procedure is pointless. Now RTR MP procedure Varunji has proposed is seriously flawed. Our proposed RTR procedure does NOT have such flaws. A full comparison with all links is at tinyurl.com/RtrMp1 . Here we have given a summary of comparison with numerical examples.
.
(2) Varunji’s proposed procedure : (i) if over 25% voters sign a recall petition, then after signature verification, there will be recall poll (ii) if over 75% of all voters vote YES in recall poll, then MP is recalled, and new election will be held (iii) Varunji’s procedure doesnt depend on votes MP had got in the election he became MP
Example : Say a Loksabha has 20,00,000 voters. So if 25% = 500,000 voters sign recall petition, then there will be recall poll. And if 75% = 15,00,000 voters vote YES for recall, then MP is recalled and new election will be there. Recalled MP can contest election and he may win.
Varunji’s procedure uses “negative recall” i.e. recall is done only on opposition to existing MP. And recall and replacement don’t happen in same poll, and so vacuum may arise. Other flaws in his proposed procedure are – (2a) Collectors don’t have specimen signatures to verify voters’ signatures (2b) over 40% voters don’t know how to sign. (2c) Say an existing MP has support of 35% voters and other person now has support of 45%, then also, other person can NOT replace existing MP. (2d) Say existing MP has support of 30% voters and is still most preferred, then also there can be a recall poll, even though he is still most preferred
.
(3) Procedure proposed by us at RRP : We give more emphasis on RTR District Education Officer (see tinyurl.com/RtrDeo2 ), RTR District Police Chief, RTR PM, etc. Full draft of our RTR-MP procedure is at tinyurl.com/RtrMp1 . Summary is - (3a) say a Loksabha constituency has N voters and say MP had got M votes. (3b) after election, any person can register as alternative for existing MP (3c) voter can approve at most 5 alternative candidates anyday (3d) voter can cancel approval anyday; approve anyone else anyday (3e) if anyday, a candidate’s approval count crosses (M + 5% of N), and his approval count is also more than existing MP, then there is recall poll (3f) In recall poll, if an alternative obtains more votes than existing MP and he also gets more than (M + 5% of N) votes, then and then only existing MP will be removed and replaced by the alternative or else existing MP will continue.
.
Our procedure uses “positive recall” i.e. recall poll and recall are done after an alternative proves that he has more support than existing MP. And recall and replacement are done in same poll. So there is no vacuum and chaos.
Example of RRP procedure : Say a constituency has N = 20,00,000 voters. Say winning MP had got M = 650,000 votes. After election, any person can register himself as an alternative. The voter can approve existing MP, can also approve any 5 alternative candidates and can cancel approval anyday. Say approval of an alternative is more than existing MP, and also over (M + N * 5%) = (650,000 + 5% * 20,00,000) = 750,000. Then and then only, there is recall poll. And in recall poll, if replacement candidate gets more votes than existing MP, and gets more votes than (M + N * 5%) = 750,000 in this example, then existing MP is removed and alternative becomes new MP. Or else, existing MP continues. Our procedure looks complex, but doesn’t have flaws present in Varunji’s procedure.
.
(4) Why procedure we at RRP have proposed is better?
I will explain by numerical examples. In all examples, constituency has N = 20,00,000 voters.
(Ex1) Say MP X had won with M = 650,000 votes. Now one may be able to get signatures of 25% = 500,000 voters for recall.. But 75% = 1500,000 voters may not agree for X’s recall, because 650,000 do support X. So recall poll will fail. So there can be spurious recall polls in Varunji’s procedure. This wont happen in our procedure because recall poll in our procedure happens only when an alternative has approval of atleast (M + 5% of N) = 750,000 voters’ approvals (in this example)
(Ex2) Say X won with 350,000 votes. Then it is possible that 500,000 voters will sign for recall and 15,00,000 may even say YES in recall poll. But in election after recall poll, if X gets 350,000 and still has highest number of votes, then again X will get re-elected. So Varunji’s procedures can cause spurious recall. This wont happen in our procedure because recall poll happens only when one alternative has more support than existing MP.
(Ex3) Say MP X won with 650,000 votes and say after 1 year, some alternative Y has support of say 800,000 voters. Then in Varunji’s procedure, recall wont happen, because X still has support of over 25% of voters. Whereas in our procedure, recall of X can happen, and Y can become new MP. So in Varuji’s procedure, in a large number of cases where recall “should” happen, recall wont happen. This flaw isnt there in our procedure.
.
So we politely request Varunji and all voters of India to consider both recall procedures and decide. And If you decide to support our recall procedure, then pls tweet – “ @PmoIndia pls print Right to Recall MP draft given at mygov.in/comment/101390431 #RrpRtrMP “ ..
.
---
.
(1) We request Varunji and all voters of India, to consider RTR procedure we have proposed. For a detailed article, see http://tinyurl.com/RtrMp1 (2) for videos on RTR, Jury System, wealth tax, why we must cancel draconian GST, see http://youtube.com/RightToRecallGroup
.
