User:Johnjoywiki/Comparative democratic deficit

Democratic deficit shows deficiencies of democracy in comparison to in-achievable utopia of ideal democracy. This original method is therefore insufficient as its conclusion will always be the same: deficient level of democracy. Comparative democratic method on the other hand evaluates if a given democracy is better or worse than other real and functioning democracy. In this way it is possible to come to a conclusion that democracy suffers from democratic deficit (deficiency) or enjoys democratic proficit (better in comparison).

Thanks to this method we come to the conclusion that the EU improves democracy in some aspects while in other aspects it suffers from democratic deficit.

Ideal of democracy
Most of current methods evaluates democracy of states or international organisations in comparison to the democratic ideal, which is in-achievable according to Robert Dahl. Democratic ideal requires states to apply inapplicable criteria. All democracies, therefore suffer from democratic deficit using this methodology.

Ideal democracy criteria:
The closer an existing democratic system (polyarchy) is to the below mentioned criteria, the more it approaches the in-achievable ideal of democracy.


 * 1) Voting equality at the decisive stage (each citizen must be assured his or her judgments will be counted as equal in weights to the judgments of others)
 * 2) Effective participation (citizens must have adequate and equal opportunities to form their preference and place questions on the public agenda and express reasons for one outcome over the other)
 * 3) Englightened understanding (citizens must enjoy ample and equal opportunities for discovering and affirming what choice would best serve their interests)
 * 4) Control of the agenda (demos or people must have the opportunity to decide what political matters actually are and what should be brought up for deliberation)
 * 5) Inclusiveness (equality must extend to all citizens within the state, everyone has legitimate stake within the political process)

Comparative method
An alternative approach is to compare two existing democracies with the help of comparative method as did for example Andrew Moravcsik in his paper on the democratic deficit of the EU. With the help of this method you can compare one country to another, which represent an existing democracy. In this way the conclusions become more relevant and of practical use. Contrasting to the original method it does not answer the question if an existing democracy suffers from democratic deficit compared to a utopia of democracy, but what level of democracy did a country achieved compared to another existing democracy.

== Comparison of the EU and Germany: ==

The EU is more democratic

 * Equality of votes is at a better level in the European Parliament which counts in all casted votes. During general elections to the German federal parliament an electoral threshold at 3% is applied. This means that votes casted for political parties winning less than 3% are not counted in. Theoretically in the elections to the European Parliament in the year 2014 by the application of this electoral threshold altogether 10.4% of casted votes would not have been counted in.


 * European parliament includes more inhabitants who are living on its territory and have to follow the European law. The EU gives extra voting rights also to migrants from other member countries. In contrast citizens from other member countries living on the territory of Germany and obeying its laws are not allowed to vote for the members of German parliament. According to the democratic theory, however, everyone obliged to follow laws should be able also able to participate on its creation.

EU reached the same level of democracy

 * Institutions with the same level of democratic legitimacy propose law in Germany and the EU. Indirectly elected Federal Council (Bundesrat) and indirectly elected Federal government of Germany proposed 65% of inaugurated laws. This is similar to indirectly elected European Commission proposing laws in the EU.


 * In the case of legislative process, the proposed laws are voted upon by institutions with the same level of democratic legitimacy. Directly elected European Parliament and indirectly elected European Council enact laws at the European level. Directly elected German federal parliament (Bundestag) together with indirectly elected Federal Council (Bundesrat) enact laws in Germany.

EU suffers from a comparative democratic deficit

 * The EU suffers from a comparative democratic deficit in 35% of the cases because all laws are proposed by indirectly elected European Commission while in Germany 35% of enacted laws were proposed by directly elected German federal parliament (Bundestag).


 * Participation in elections to the German federal parliament is higher than participation during the election to the the European Parliament (10-20%).


 * In the case of the ordinary legislative process the European Union suffers from a comparative democratic deficit. The indirectly elected Federal Council (Bundesrat) could be over-voted by directly elected German federal parliament (Bundestag) which gives the enacted law some extra legitimacy. There are cases when directly elected European Parliament does not have the right to participate in the legislative process. In this case the European laws are being enacted only by indirectly representatives of the member states. The foreign policy of the EU could be an example.