I think that Moravicisik has strong points, I can not completely judge whether he is right, but his argumentation is persuasive. The text is quite in line with the image of the EU that we have seen in the course, we have discussed the working by consensus, as well as the formal procedures, which are things that the article is based off. It is easy to find deficits, but hard to find unprecedented democratic deficits that are handled in a more democratic way at the national level. Most of these sources of possible deficits brought up by proponents of the democratic deficit, are irrelevant however, because they pertain to processes that are not less influenced by electoral behavior, than they are at the national level. There are however also areas where the EU might seem to suffer from democratic deficit, an important example of this is the ECB, which is unprecedentedly free in its decision making. Furthermore, the exceptional amount of voting within the EU is discussed, as well as the narrow mandates that the EU gives. There is a discussion of the separation of powers, which according to Moravcisik has been implemented well. He stresses that the EU has implemented many checks and balances in various forms. Moreover, he thinks that the European Union is suffering from a smaller democratic deficit than many other advanced democracy. Moravisik argues that the European union does not suffer from a democratic deficit, as others have argued.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |