Re: Thoughts about constitution

[Arun Sharma <adsharma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 11:02:15PM +0530, Gurunandan R. Bhat wrote:
> > [5] I agree with Arun that having a weighted representation on LI
> > based directly on the number of members in each LUG is a difficult
> > proposition, and one that is open to abuse/misuse and
> > doubts/suspicions.
> 
> I thought Arun initially held the view that weighted representation is a
> Good Thing. Please correct me.
> 

That's right. I think some kind of weightage is necessary, but implementing
it is going to be tricky - which is why I suggested some kind of broad
classification.

> I urge you to see the consequences of this: Two large LUGs (hypothetically
> Bangalore and Delhi) would have enough representation on LI to decide and
> rule on matters that affect the rest of the ten to twelve LUGs who
> probably have a larger combined representation. Think why India has had 9
> out ten PMs from the state of U.P. 

That's possible only if the voting patterns among other LUGs is
heterogeneous and the pattern in the dominant LUGs is homogeneous.

A good counter example is Awami League (Bangladeshi party) getting a
majority in the 1970 elections in Pakistan.

	-Arun