Direct Voting by Property Owners

IF 1.9 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW University of Chicago Law Review Pub Date : 2010-01-01 DOI:10.7916/D8CZ36PP
T. Merrill
{"title":"Direct Voting by Property Owners","authors":"T. Merrill","doi":"10.7916/D8CZ36PP","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Direct voting by property owners is a widespread but controversial tool for resolving disputes over local collective goods. Direct voting has powerful advantages, in that it can harness the superior knowledge of many local minds, resolve controversies in a way that is perceived to be legitimate, and eliminate corrupt dealmaking. But it also has serious pitfalls, if local voters are poorly informed, or if they ignore external effects on other communities, or if the process is distorted by majoritarian or minoritarian bias. To capitalize on the advantages of local voting, and minimize the risks, this Article proposes that direct voting be limited to local property owners, in a one-owner, one-vote fashion. The issues chosen for resolution by direct voting should also be ones with uniform high stakes for property owners, and minimal spillover effects outside the voting community. Applications to controversies over the creation of local historic districts and the use of eminent domain for economic development are discussed.","PeriodicalId":51436,"journal":{"name":"University of Chicago Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"275-310"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Chicago Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8CZ36PP","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Direct voting by property owners is a widespread but controversial tool for resolving disputes over local collective goods. Direct voting has powerful advantages, in that it can harness the superior knowledge of many local minds, resolve controversies in a way that is perceived to be legitimate, and eliminate corrupt dealmaking. But it also has serious pitfalls, if local voters are poorly informed, or if they ignore external effects on other communities, or if the process is distorted by majoritarian or minoritarian bias. To capitalize on the advantages of local voting, and minimize the risks, this Article proposes that direct voting be limited to local property owners, in a one-owner, one-vote fashion. The issues chosen for resolution by direct voting should also be ones with uniform high stakes for property owners, and minimal spillover effects outside the voting community. Applications to controversies over the creation of local historic districts and the use of eminent domain for economic development are discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
业主直接投票
业主直接投票是解决地方集体财产纠纷的一种广泛但有争议的手段。直接投票具有强大的优势,因为它可以利用许多当地人的优越知识,以一种被认为是合法的方式解决争议,并消除腐败交易。但是,如果当地选民不了解情况,或者如果他们忽视了对其他社区的外部影响,或者如果这个过程被多数主义或少数主义偏见所扭曲,那么它也会有严重的陷阱。为了充分利用地方投票的优势,最大限度地降低风险,本文建议将直接投票限制在地方财产所有者,以一业主一票的方式进行。选择通过直接投票解决的问题也应该是那些对财产所有者具有一致的高利害关系的问题,并且在投票社区之外的溢出效应最小。应用于争议的地方历史街区的创建和使用征用权的经济发展进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
2
期刊介绍: The University of Chicago Law Review is a quarterly journal of legal scholarship. Often cited in Supreme Court and other court opinions, as well as in other scholarly works, it is among the most influential journals in the field. Students have full responsibility for editing and publishing the Law Review; they also contribute original scholarship of their own. The Law Review"s editorial board selects all pieces for publication and, with the assistance of staff members, performs substantive and technical edits on each of these pieces prior to publication.
期刊最新文献
Frankfurter, Abstention Doctrine, and the Development of Modern Federalism: A History and Three Futures Remedies for Robots Privatizing Personalized Law Order Without Law Democracy’s Deficits
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1