RE: Some more research needed

[Charudatt <charu@iced.com>]

	Sanjeev Sabhlok[SMTP:sabhlok@almaak.usc.edu] wrote:
	On electoral reform:
> 	>Regarding contribution to parties at no time can a party have
>    >more than half 1/2 of its total contributions from corporations.
> 
> 	>What do you say Charu, do you agree?
> 
> My short answer is:
> I think this is an excellent compromise and would go along with it.

	. . .
	>Two concerns:

	>a) My question: I go by principles. What principle was used to
determine
	>this ad-hoc number? Any derivation from micro-foundations or
>philosophical principles?  According to me there can be no limits
imposed >unless there are very strong and very powerful reasons for
that.

	> b) How about the feasibility (the process)? The process is the
key. How
	>will you determine and impose such limits? What mechanism can
you >devise to not drive contributions underground again. No ad-hoc
limits have 

I'm confused here.

Do you suggest we go by principle or by feasibility? The two seem
contradictory. 

I was agreeing to a compromise by diluting a principle [no corporate
funding of elections] on the basis of feasibility. 

-Charu

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a posting to India_Policy Discussion list: india_policy@cine.net
Rules, Procedures, Archives:     http://www.indiaconsult.com/indiapolicy/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------