EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND ITS CRITICS

I debated with myself if I should vote in the European Parliament election. It was also a specific community election in the region I belong to, so decided to go and vote. (I voted "yes" for building a highway in the area.) I ended up voting for the new Euro-skeptic party called the "June List." The "June List" got 14.4% and 3 seats in the Parliament. Hopefully they could create a sort of gridlock together with other critics in the HQ of bureaucracy, i.e. in Brussels, and at the same time change the opinion here in Sweden. Many of the candidates of the "June List" are economists, businessmen, and supporters of a free market economy.

Now it is time for a referendum on the EU Constitution!

UPDATE 06/14/04:
Arthur Chrenkoff invites you to enter a no-spin zone (to paraphrase Bill O'Reilly). Read his post, Spinning the Euro-results. [Via InstaPundit.] Read Mark Steyn's comment on the United Kingdom Independence Party, in his article, The lunatic mainstream had better start worrying fast. The leaders of the mainstream parties are worried about the election results in many countries and are calling for a mobilization against the Euro-skeptics. Robert F. Gay ends his article, Skeptics Win EU Election, in the following way:

In commentary following the election, losing parties complained that voters do not understand the work of the European Union and its importance, indicating that there needs to be a continued pro-EU propaganda campaign to educate them. But voters have been sending the same message again and again and it doesn't look like they'll mind if the door hits the backsides of a few stubborn politicians on their way out. (MensNewsDaily.com, 06/14/04.)

UPDATE 06/20/04:
J.F.O. McAllister of Time Magazine is asking the following question: Closer Union Or Superstate?

Does this constitution, as the Euro-skeptics claim, push the E.U. far down the path to a single superstate?

The straight answer is no. Though countries like France, Germany and Belgium want the E.U. to integrate more, other countries like Britain, Denmark, Sweden and Poland do not—they feel the heat of the Euro-skeptics behind them and want to preserve national sovereignty without turning their backs on the constitution. ... Under the new constitution, E.U. member states will still retain a national veto in foreign policy, taxation and social affairs. (Time Magazine, 06/28/04, Vol. 163, No. 26.)

The Daily Telegraph has a different take on situation:

The constitution to which Mr Blair has just put his name gives the union legal personality, creates a single EU jurisdiction, establishes a European criminal code and provides explicitly for the supremacy of EU law over national statutes. "This constitution," says Article I.5, "shall have primacy over the laws of the Member States." If this is not a federal state, what is? (This is what it means. Telegraph.co.uk, 06/20/04.)

At least you can't accuse the bureaucrats to rush things... It has taken about two years for them to get a consensus on the constitution. The constitution will not take effect before year 2006. The next point on the agenda is to elect a new President of the Executive Commission. Deutsche Welle reports:

The leaders did put off naming a new president of the Executive Commission to replace outgoing European Commission President Romano Prodi. The differences on the decision underscored tensions between Britain, France and Germany that remain on the future course of the EU. (European Leaders Agree on Constitution. DW-World.de, 06/19/04.)

Maybe "Dr. Emmanuel Goebbels-Cant, EU Commissioner for Political Philosophy" @ Euro-Trashed.com will be available...?!