Saturday, February 7, 2009

Popular Vote

PERAK Snapshot

Total Voters = 1,196,650
DUN Seats = 59

As per March 8, 2008 GE Results
Pakatan PKR-DAP-PAS (PR) = 31 seats
Barisan Nasional (BN) = 28 seats

As per Feb 4, 2009
BN = 28
PR = 28
Indy = 3 (But friendly to BN), so BN holds simple majority.

Refer to the Pie Chart: GE Results
Total Vote = 843,860 (all returned ballots minus void or 'Undi Rosak')
Total PR Vote = 442,660
Total BN Vote = 399,565
Different PR-BN = 43,095

Should we adopt the popularity vote instead?
Regardless of anybody hopping anywhere, the Popularity Vote is the one that determined who supposed to head the Executive branch of Government (to form an administration). Let the Legislative (DUN) ratio change because of the Article 10 (Freedom to Associate/Disassociate). But we use the Popularity Vote as the measure of the People's preferred party to administer (not RULE .... Rulers (King/Sultans/Raja) Rule or MEMERINTAH, but People (Political Parties) Administered or MENTADBIR.

What if the one who top the popularity gains less seat (not holds the majority)?
For me it is a better Check & Balance.

Remember Democrats control the Congress while Bush (Republican) was finishing his last year of 2nd term presidency, and how his additional budget for Iraq was turned down by the Congress.

So that every vote is count, regardless the guy that you vote for lost the seat contest, your vote still going to reflect your preferred choice of Executive.

Ada berani?


  1. If I am not mistaken, in the US, the demarcation between congress and the president arises because there are two 'separate' voting process.

    The suggestion can cause a stalemate in the administration of a state. assuming that a MB who is now a minority in the house proposed a motion. In Malaysia, there is 100% chance that the other side of the House will reject outright. Hence, all motions will come from the other side of the House which will render the MB as useless.

    If we apply the same at the Federal level. Unlike in the US where Congressman can move a Bill (that's why we can find Sarbane-Oxley Act named after the congressman), all bills comes from the government. If the Governmnet do not have the majority in the House, all bills will be rejected. If it take the 'opposition' who is in the majority to move a bill, what is the use of the government of the day?

  2. Mr. Lawyer,
    There are 2 separate role for Executive and Legislative. Assemblymen are Lawmaker, and Executive are Policy-maker, hence assuring the day-to-day activities are smooth. Not all policy are in the form of Law, most of it are Executive Orders, or in Malaysia is famously known as Cabinet Directives.
    The Executive will impose policies within their jurisdiction and stipulate powers. For me, it is OK for them to be majority in the House because it will be a good Check-and-Balance. The Legislative meanwhile could propose new bills and these will revolutionized the WHIP concept. I still could recall the Penang Outer Ring Road incident where the Assemblywomen in that area was warned by the residents aka Voters not to support the project which is need to seek approval via an enactment from the Penang DUN. The YB choose to take a neutral stand towards the enactment, (Just BERKECUALI and not against it!). But, she was suspended from the party as a consequences for that action. Now, come back to the real question, "Are you a Wakil Rakyat or Wakil Party?"
    This kind of problem really 'disturbed' me and I know my view is radical but at least somebody could fine tune it intellectually and we could come out with a formula for an improvised approach. (That's the purpose of having a Youth wing for political parties in Malaysia)

  3. your idea may not be viable if one entity having dual functions; legislative and executive. The separation of legislative and executive must first be realized.

    The situation as it is make it akward for the exeutive who advance the bill and later wear the hat of legislative turn down the same bill. funny isnt it? that is why it will not happen until legislative and executives are two different people.

  4. What I learned in my Form 2 History class is we do have separation of power concept. We have this 3 pillars under the King, namely: Executive, Jurisdiction and Legislative. Only since 1988, these 3 bodies seem like criss-crossing each other. The only grey is the one who is in-controlled majority of the Legislative is the Chief Executive. This is the main reason why I think that we are in the midst of a Constitutional crisis.