Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Where You Stand Is Where You Sit - Addendum

That Yamada Masahiko should be the leader of the opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership now makes a great deal of sense. Yes, he is a former minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, making him a logical candidate on an intellectual level. However, as the representative of Nagasaki District #3, the second smallest district by population in the country, Yamada is set to lose his official position. For no matter under which reform of the House of Representatives one chooses (Each party has at least one reform plan. The Democratic Party of Japan has two. The New Komeito, terrified of being relegated to the ranks of a micro-party, has three.) Nagasaki District #3 is set to disappear.

Challenging the central leadership of the party has no downside for Yamada, as it might for others. Yamada has literally nothing to lose.


Joe said...

I'm curious; what are the time frames for the gerrymandering, er, re-districting?

I know the Supreme Court has said the current vote-to-population ratio is unconstitutional, but what does that mean in practical terms? Can the SC put the brakes on an election until things are sorted out?

Jan Moren said...

Joe, that's a good question. They can invalidate an election after it happened, and there'd be a lot of awkward questions about the legitimacy of the election if somebody tried to run one without a reform.

Of course, if the supreme court has the ability and the duty to stop elections taking place then that opens up a certain kind of opportunity. If you run the majority party, and is imaginative and lacking a bit in the moral department you could always simply refuse to vote for any such reform bill. Elections would be postponed indefinitely, leaving you in power for as long as you want.

Theoretically, of course; in practice the situation would probably quickly deteriorate to the point where you're forced out, legally or not.

Anonymous said...

OT, but did you notice partial solution to where to put the marines, now appears to be Darwin Australia? Guam being a refueling stop and not a forward base, this is pragmatic/opportunistic "planning".


Anonymous said...

Okinawa to Darwin?

Good link as any

Joe said...

Mr. Moren: Then I suppose that it doesn't mean anything at all, because while ruling that it is unconstitutional, they also explicitly refused to invalidate the last election.

F. said...

I know Yamada-san very well on a personal level. Did you know he was a farmer himself, before he become a lawyer?

He actually believes in what he is doing now. Quite a rare treat in today's Nagata-cho, perchance?