On Referendums


A while back, I saw this BBC debate on the terms that Prime Minister Teresa May was able to draw up for Brexit. As expected, one spoke in favour, another against. The third panelist blew me away: he pointed out that it was now becoming increasingly clear to the public that Brexit was a bad idea, that staying in the EU was the lesser of two evils. Therefore, he argued, it was a time for another referendum with the same question: Stay or Leave? While a referendum is not legally binding, this sounded insane: what’s the point of a referendum if you’ll hold another one when you don’t like the outcome? And will they hold a re-re-referendum after that? Where does this stop?

So are referendums a bad idea per se? Is the general public unqualified to evaluate complicated questions, even one as “educated” as the British?

Conversely, Malcolm Gladwell’s book, David and Goliath, talks of Mike Reynolds, a man whose 18 yo daughter was killed during a robbery. By two repeat offenders. Reynolds became an activist, who concluded that:
“The penalties associated with breaking the law were too low.”
Reynolds came up with a short and simple proposal. For a second offense, your term would be double the one given to a first-time offender. And for a third offense, you’d be put away for 25 years minimum. No exceptions or loopholes.

Reynolds and his group collected thousands of signatures to qualify for a state referendum in California. It passed with 72% support and became a law (in)famously in 1994 known as the Three Strikes Law.

What did the “largest penal experiment in American history” reveal?
1)      The very folks Three Strikes should scare (criminals) aren’t exactly the most rational folks who do cost-benefit analysis before acting.
2)     The third strike happened to guys in their late 30’s, early 40’s. Statistically, they were past their “peak”. The system was locking away people who were probably not the biggest dangers to society anymore.
3)     And if you locked away younger men for long, they usually left behind kids too small to fend for themselves. Kids who’d then gravitate to crime.
And so in 2012, California called for state referendum to scale back Three Strikes: the argument was that the benefits were simply not worth the cost. Remember the law originated based on raw emotion that the general public could relate to. The repeal argument was based on reason and data. And yet, the 2012 referendum did vote to scale back Three Strikes radically.

Does Three Strikes prove the general public can respond to reason after all? Was the fault with the anti-Brexit campaigners who did a poor job explaining the risks? Or did the anti-Brexit campaigners not understand it themselves? In other words, does it prove that there’s no inherent problem with a referendum after all?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Student of the Year

Image
As a toddler, my daughter loved Alia Bhatt’s songs, esp. the ones from Student of the Year . (That movie did have many good songs and well-choreographed dances). Fast forward to present day, when she is 12 yo. She rarely watches Hindi movies now, but one of the few ones she likes of late, Raja aur Rani ki Prem Kahani has, yes, Alia Bhatt.   If I had any hopes that there was anything to be read in the name of her toddler-time favorite ( Student of the Year ), they have been dashed. Our conversations come exam time are perfectly captured by this photo and its caption: In fact, the pic below captures how she and I look at her answer sheets – me intently, she with an expression of “It’s over, so why are you even looking at it?”   Of late, we pull her leg and tell her that she isn’t showing any signs of academic prowess, she’d better find a rich guy to marry. Some time later, she showed us this meme on the Internet: “Me No Study, Me No Care Me Go Marry Millionaire If He Die
Read more

The Retort of the "Luxury Person"

Image
Coming up with biting and witty retorts. It’s something we dream of, but rarely manage to pull off. Worse, the more we stew over the offending remark, the more likely we are to come up with that dream retort, as Calvin ruefully points out: During our last holiday at the Taj Resort, seeing my wife carrying towels to our poolside chairs, one of the kids there mistook her for a member of the staff and asked for a towel. When my wife narrated this to us, I did not imagine that my 8 yo daughter would come up with her own retort. But a day later, my daughter recapped the incident, an incident that didn’t even involve her in the first place , and said, “You know what I’d have told that kid who asked for the towel?”. And without waiting for an answer, she told us anyway: “I don’t work here. I too am a luxury person who is living at this resort. Go get your own towel.” We were highly amused by the phrase she had coined: “luxury person”. It certainly captures the kind of holid
Read more

Animal Senses #7: Touch and Remote Touch

Instinctively, we think touch is based on contact. Not entirely true, explains Ed Yong in Immense World – there’s a more important aspect than contact: “These incredible feats are possible through movement. If you rest a fingertip upon a surface, you can get only a limited idea of its features. But as soon you’re allowed to move, everything changes. Hardness becomes apparent with a press. Textures resolve at a stroke.” As you run your fingers over a surface, they hit the tiny peaks and troughs and set off vibrations in the mechanoreceptors at their tips.   At the tip of its snout, the star-nosed mole has many pairs of hairless appendages. It uses them to touch things around itself. Alive or dead? Food or ignore? It does these movements at an insane speed. In the time it takes to blink our eyes, the star-nosed mole can probe, identify and swallow its food. “Light may be the fastest thing in the universe, but light sensors have their limits, and the star-nosed mole’s sense of
Read more