2 posts tagged “bc-stv”

Observations made during this latest election season.

(Please note that all statements are meant to be general to my population and not specific.)

1. It seems that we do not seem to hold the principles of democracy in high esteem

Democracy means giving voice to the people, even if you don't like what people are saying.  From one conversation, said in a disapproving tone: "Well, STV means someone from the Marijuana Party could get in." * Now, that person is entirely correct - a representative from this party could get in, if s/he had enough votes.  So what?  If enough people vote for it, it can happen. That is how our representative democracy works.  On my part, I certainly don't agree with my fellow voters at every turn, but I must be willing to accept their choices and the outcome. (Until the next election, that is. ;) 

1. We seem to be expecting less and less of our representatives in government.

Let me back me back up a bit:

Under STV and the way we've historically voted, there is a likelihood of returning a minority government to the legislature.  Some see minority governments as ineffectual and that majorities are necessary for "anything to get done.  After all, [the politicians] can't get things done very well as it is."  (Quote from another recent conversation.)  With this (not unwarranted) criticism, I see a lowering of the bar when it comes to the job performance of our representatives - we assume that since they don't get on well right now, having more opinions in the mix (even if they are desired, ie:voted in, by the population) to be a negative thing.  I feel that we have a right to demand our representatives get along and compromise and “get things done” because they are the ones we've asked to it and by taking office, they've agreed. It shouldn't matter if we are asking them to work with a minority or a majority.   Finger pointing isn't the point, getting on with task of governing our province regardless of who you have to work with, is. By saying no to STV simply because we don't have faith in our politicians to get along seems to be flipping our priorities – it's the politicians who need to shape up. 

I first began to really notice the ramifications of this with the confidence crisis last winter. Just like with the outcry with the possibility of a coalition forming (specifially against the idea that such a move would be illegal and/or undemocratic), it would seem that people do not understand how our current electoral system works. If one does not understand how our current first-past-the-post system works, they aren't as likely to understand why it's ineffective. As a result, convincing people why or how change is important meets with resistance. Lack of education seems to leave people open to responding to, what essentially amounts to as fear-mongering. Even I've been struck with doubt after reading a particularly persuasive piece before I head back to the basics of the systems and examine the arguments. The point is, I understand a lot about this and even I fall prey to it; how much easier it would be if I wasn't adequately informed. Just this weekend I read an op-ed piece our local paper that used the Stanley Cup finals as an analogy to STV. Sadly, the analogy is, at best, misleading, and at worst, false. (For those who have seen it, because it's been circulating other places – you can't get SEATS without the VOTES. Votes can't trump seats, no matter what system you're in. Oh, and we're in a multi-party system where there are many winners (of seats), so that muddies the waters, too.)

The current major parties have been pretty quiet about STV overall and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if that has spread some mistrust of STV as well. (Without them taking the time to rectify anything.) STV turns out a legislature far more reflective of the majority vote that our current system. Far, far better, in fact. Currently, a government can (and has) gained all of the power with only 30 – 40% of the votes. Therefore it is not in the best interest of the current major parties to change the electoral system. However, it is certainly in the best interest of the electorate, us.

I understand that there are plenty of people out there who heartily disagree with the positions I take. I'm quite alright with that. I don't want to sound as arrogant as some politicians I hear who make out anyone who disagrees with them to be a simpleton, or moronic. However, it is important that the conclusions drawn come from the facts and information even if our interpretations are different.

So get education and get out the vote!

*My apologies to those supporters of this party.  I use it as an example because, you must admit, we're not likely to elect a party whose primary platform has to do with legalizing a drug.  Just saying. 

In about five days, the province I live in is holding an election to fill up our legislature again.  I think I've decided for whom I'll vote, but I feel like it's a lesser of evils; I just can't find the right combo of party policy, leadership qualities and representative acumen.  I'm starting to get rather depressed about it.

However, for me, this election cycle has a lot less to do with who we send back to represent us and more to do with deciding how we do that in the future.  Along with casting ballots, we're also being asked to decide whether or not we want to change our electoral system from the current first-past-the-post system.  It's called the Single Transferable Vote (STV) and is a form of proportional representation (used in many, many European counties) with our form being almost identical to that of Ireland. 

I've done a lot of reading on the subject from both sides of the argument.  I recognize fully that there will be some not-so-great possibilities, but no worse that what we currently face and have decided that, in the balance, I think this electoral process is a good one and should be used here.  I feel like it would result in a legislature far more representative (truly) than our current system.  And I feel very strongly about this.

The 'yes' side to this debate has a lot of work to do.  It has to work against inertia.  STV isn't as obvious to people and it requires people take time to be educated.  It's far harder to effect change; people choose the path of least resistance and, given the time I've spent talking to different people and reading the letters to the editor and the sound bites on TV, I'm don't think that education is really happening.  No, I'm not saying that just because someone disagrees with me that they aren't educated on the subject.  What I am hearing, however, are a lot of statements made against the system, but when questioned further, they don't actually know how or even why those statements are or aren't true.  (There's a lot of misinformation out there, too.) 

Essentially, I'll be surprised if the referendum passes because I believe that people will take the path of least resistance and embrace the devil the know (so to speak.)

And this really, really, bums me out.  I get depressed and frusterated.  Chris gets angry. 

Last week while talking about democracy and politics, we realized that we're getting pretty riled about it.  We had to take a moment to realize that, though not insignificant, we can't let politics dictate our own attitudes and focus and response to life.  God is still God regardless of who governs, regardless of our electoral system.  Life marches on.
That thought calms me, encourages me.

And then the things of life happen around me: Joyful things.  Painful things.  People get sick and injured.  People make poor choices.  People make good ones.  Lives change unimaginably in a moment.  Suddenly I'm praying like I've been given new wind.  Life is marching on.  My mind swirls.  People become more important again.  Politics fade a bit.

I'll still vote next week.  I'll continue to ask that others do, too.  It is still significant, after all.  And though I may be disappointed (intertia, remember?) I can be assured that God hasn't changed, that people are imprortant and that joy can be found in a lot of places.