The Democratic Deficit Debate: Competing Theories of Liberty and Democracy (original) (raw)
Related papers
The myth of Europe's' democratic deficit'
2008
Third, democracy requires political equality. Without this there would not be a straightforward “rule by the people”. Rather, there would also be an element of rule “of some of the people by others of the people”. Political equality, in turn, comprises equality of votes (one person, one vote) and equality of voice (equal access of all points of view to the political agenda).
The Problem of " Democratic Deficit " in the European Union
This study tries to understand the causes and effects of the problem of democratic deficit in the European Union (EU). There is a multitude of reasons and solutions regarding the democratic deficit in the EU, which lead to complex interpretations. Generally, academic literature on the issue of democratic deficit in EU relies on two opposing arguments. The majority argument is that there is democratic deficit in the EU; the minority argument rejects this view it. This study falls within the majority argument. The majority argument draws on the two dimensions of the EU. First argument asserts (institutional) that the EU's institutional design and structure is not democratic. Second argument (socio-psychological) claims that the EU is not capable of being a 'real' democracy in principle, since the structural and social prerequisites, on which democratic rule depends, are lacking at the European level.
Europe's 'Democratic Deficit': The Question of Standards
European Law Journal, 1998
Arguments about Europe’s democratic deficit are really arguments about the nature and ultimate goals of the integration process. Those who assume that economic integration must lead to political integration tend to apply to European institutions standards of legitimacy derived from the theory and practice of parliamentary democracies. We argue that such standards are largely irrelevant at present. As long as the majority of voters and their elected representatives oppose the idea of a European federation, while supporting far-reaching economic integration, we cannot expect parliamentary democracy to flourish in the Union. Economic integration without political integration is possible only if politics and economics are kept as separate as possible. The depoliticisation of European policy-making is the price we pay in order to preserve national sovereignty largely intact. These being the preferences of the voters, we conclude that Europe’s ‘democratic deficit’ is democratically justified.The expression ‘democratic deficit,’ however, is also used to refer to the legitimacy problems of non-majoritarian institutions, and this second meaning is much more relevant to a system of limited competences such as the EC. Now the key issues for democratic theory are about the tasks which may be legitimately delegated to institutions insulated from the political process, and how to design such institutions so as to make independence and accountability complementary and mutually supporting, rather than antithetical. If one accepts the ‘regulatory model’ of the EC, then, as long as the tasks delegated to the European level are precisely and narrowly defined, non-majoritarian standards of legitimacy should be sufficient to justify the delegation of the necessary powers.
2003
Concern about the EU's 'democratic deficit'is misplaced. Judged against prevailing standards in existing advanced industrial democracies, rather than those of an ideal plebiscitary or parliamentary democracy, the EU is democratically legitimate. Its institutions are tightly constrained by constitutional checks and balances: narrow mandates, fiscal limits, super-majoritarian and concurrent voting requirements and separation of powers. There is little evidence that the EU impacts an unjustifiable neo-liberal bias on EU policy.
The Democratic Deficit of the European Union
Living Reviews in Democracy, 2009
In Dahl's view, proponents of guardianship find the assumption that ordinary people can be counted on to understand and defend their own interests preposterous. Instead, power should be entrusted to a small group of people uniquely qualified to govern (Dahl 1989; 52).
2008
This paper acknowledges the still unsettled debate on the EU democratic deficit by arguing that divergences among the scholars emanate from the methodological and the conceptual difficulties that the concept itself have when applied to the case of EU. Given the lack of a common ground for understanding the EU democratic deficit debate I propose an all-inclusive model ('Democratic Deficit Space') of how to understand the EU democratic deficit arguments in the enormous already existing literature. As a last but not least point this paper will suggest how we need to look at the EU democratic deficit, putting the emphasis on the 'deficit' term rather than on the 'democracy' term
Curbing the Deficit: Democracy After the European Constitution
Imprints , 2004
This study assesses the democratic potential of the draft Constitutional Treaty for Europe. It reviews the various sources of the democratic deficit in the European Union and examines the effect of some of the provisions of the draft Constitutional Treaty on the quality of democracy at the national and supranational level. The institutional strategies contained in the Treaty collide to create a policy dilemma: increasing democratic input or enhancing political accountability. It is argued that embracing the path of accountability, rather than that of democratic input, as a reform formula, would allow us to solve the EU democratic deficit without undermining the Union’s institutional efficiency, and without jeopardizing the formation of a European political community. This line of institutional development is in tune with the post-sovereign and postnational nature of power relations on the continent in the early 21st century.
Understanding the EU democratic deficit
Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science, 2008
This paper acknowledges the still unsettled debate on the EU democratic deficit by arguing that divergences among the scholars emanate from the methodological and the conceptual difficulties that the concept itself have when applied to the case of EU. Given the lack of a common ground for understanding the EU democratic deficit debate I propose an all-inclusive model (Democratic Deficit Space) of how to understand the EU democratic deficit arguments in the enormous already existing literature. As a last but not least point this paper will suggest how we need to look at the EU democratic deficit, putting the emphasis on the deficit term rather than on the democracy term.