There's just no way to get some people to vote and no way to keep some people
from voting. For One Russian Lawmaker, Bequeathing 31 ‘Aye’ Votes
Vyacheslav K. Osipov, a governing party lawmaker, was absent on Wednesday but still cast 31 votes in the lower house of Parliament, all of them ayes.
You might say he was in an agreeable mood, except that he was dead.
While it was not known exactly when Mr. Osipov died, his colleagues in the Russian Parliament held a moment of silence in his memory at 5:39 p.m., a little more than an hour after he was recorded as voting in favor of banning American adoptions of Russian children. Mr. Osipov, 75, a United Russia party deputy from Mordovia in central European Russia, had been ailing for some time…
[W]hile proxy voting by absent Duma members is relatively common, it was not immediately clear that the rules permitted voting by the deceased. In any event, United Russia members said they stopped voting on Mr. Osipov’s behalf as soon as they were informed of his death…
11 comments:
How can you vote for someone who is absent? I think that proxy voting should not be allowed. While the party that votes for the absent person may vote as they feel the absent person would, there are many factors that could cause them to vote otherwise. If we had wanted them to vote they would have been elected in instead of the other person. I do agree however that if proxy voting is to be allowed then it was appropriate for them to stop voting for him when they were informed of his death.
I don't think proxy voting is right, as someone else cannot make a decision for a voter who's absent. Given the fact that it's all politics, they would most likely vote in a way that favored themselves, not the absentee.
I just think it's interesting that people only get riled up or start caring about proxy voting once something so drastic occurs-- like a man casting a vote 31... who is dead. I do agree that in general, the idea behind proxy voting is flawed: a person's opinion can't just be assumed (especially 31 times). But overall, it also makes sense to me. Mr. Osipov was a lawmaker that represented a specific body of people: their own interests just can't be ignored if their lawmakers are not present to cast a vote. Besides, if his voting lined up pretty consistently with party ideals and the law lined up pretty evenly with previously stated goals, then it'd be largely safe to assume his vote: it'd be worse to ignore his vote and the interests/people he normally represents or stall the law in some way until his vote can be claimed.
Seems like some people are just DYING to vote......(too soon?) But in all seriousness, there needs to be more regulation on this issue. Proxy voting has always been an issue and the fact that someone could easily vote that many times before anyone realized that the voter in question was dead means there is a greater security issue at work here. This needs to become a higher priority for the Russian government because if votes can be secured that easily, their legitamicty will be six feet under too.
I would have to agree with Alyson on the fact that the lawmaker's vote is important. In the grand scheme of things, government is a continuous process, albeit (in this case) a strange situation the vote of the Russian was in the name of Democracy.
I don't see why it would be an issue especially when the man's vote is being used to represent the People.
Personally, as long as the proxy votes for Osipov are still representing his constituents, I don't think it's a huge issue. However, if his party members were using his vote to their advantage - especially on close votes - without consulting his opinion, then it's a problem. I also think the fact that the issue itself is being brought up in the media is interesting... it's a very catchy story with a big headline that sounds a little worse than it actually is. Definitely one of those attention-getter titles.
Personally, I don't think that proxy voting is exactly right. I don't think it's fair or right to vote for someone who is absent or dead. Like, I get that people want to be represented and if their representative is absent then that could be a problem for them, but people can't just go assuming a dead person's vote and vote for them, especially 31 times.
I have mixed feelings about proxy voting. It does kind of make sense, in terms of maintaining a continuity of opinion and general representation (basically casting for what the deceased politician probably would've voted for anyway). However, it also seems a little sketchy to just assume how they would've voted. It kind of seems like the remaining members of the party are just kind of taking advantage of the fact that they're deceased already, like using it as a free automatic vote. That doesn't seem quite right...
Proxy voting is definitely a problem. But this issue really brings light more to the issues over voting as a whole. The regulations on voting are talked about too much based on the lack of fraud that exists in the system, and the main problem is the politicking that lies behind who votes and how often. I think it is more necessary to focus on raising voter turnouts rather than stopping fraud issues like this one. How much weight does this pull, even though it seems drastic?
Proxy voting is completely wrong because the person is not there and thus his/her opinion is not expressed. Overall there needs to be major regulation on this issue because it seems like Proxy voting can just add more corruption to politics as it is.
Though I do not agree with proxy voting, I think that no matter if they agree with it or not, once they found out that he had passed away, they should not have taken his votes into consideration as respect for him. I also think that if somebody cares enough about a situation to vote for it (whether for or against), they should be able to show up and vote. I mean, unless they died. In which case, their votes shouldn't be taken into consideration!
Post a Comment