Voting

[myata]

Heard an interesting though brief discussion of unsatisfactory voter participation record in this, and earlier elections on CBC radio this morning. While terms like apathy, fatigue, mistrust and uselessness were thrown around, it didn't quite strike me as the real core reason(s) of the problem. And of course, our new old PM has also spoken his concern about participation in the elections.

So what are the reasons for this phenomena? I can think of a few more specific causes, but not necessarily in the order of actual priority, rather from generality to specifics.

- idleness and laziness of population

As pointed out by some professor commenting on the discussion, and I agree that it constitutes an important element of the puzzle. It's generally characteristical of societies at the top of their life cycle, about to begin the descent. These societies prefer entertainment to stimulation, avoid taking serious decisions and challenges, if at all possible, and tend worry about their little things emuch more than what's going on around them. I'm pretty sure that it explains, at least in part, the notions of "apathy", "fatigue" and disinterest. Because if somebody spends principal part of their non-working time in entertaining themselves, I see how making a few minutes trip to the polling station, and tasking their brain to make a choice could be an impossibly fatigating task. Same goes for the "I don't care". Because not caring for important choices and/or events is also a symptom of mental laziness.

- lack of real choice

But not all of it. The lack of meaningful choice in the existing system is a significant deterrent to participation in the electoral process. As in one of the headliness before the election, making a choice "Mr Mean vs cold turkey" does not sound like an interesting exciting undertaking. And in this age we do not like to task ourselves with less than exciting activities even if they represent a civil duty.

- backwardness of the electoral process

Look at the progress of technology in the last couple of decades. We now have laptops, cellphones, and ubiquitous access to the Net; yet our electoral duty is still putting a cross on a piece of paper. This just does not cut it as something exciting, or even meaningful to do, especially for the younger audience, even if ... etc.

- relevance of party politics

Our communications have developed to the extent where we can have almost instant response to vertually any question or request. Not in party politics though, that still operates on "twice a year, once in four year" schedule. That just isn't fast enough for the new generations. Same goes for openness and transparency. Availability of information in multiple media and in near real time is still far from reality for most parties, that use the new media is the old fashioned dusty way, i.e. to promote their leadership, or blast opposition, rather than to open and discuss their position.

[drewski]

its being discussed here

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....=12356&st=0

[myata]

While majoritarty system is certainly a factor in the problem, I doubt that it accounts for all of it. I'm all for a reform of electoral system with some form of PR, but I also think that other aspects of the problem should not be forgotten.

[dpwozney]

How many different choices are there for Queen? How many different possible outcomes, for who is Queen after voting day, do elections involve?

The executive authority of and over Canada is vested in the Queen.

Is the act of voting considered to be giving voluntary implied consent to the idea that Elizabeth II is Queen?

[guyser]

- idleness and laziness of population

- lack of real choice

- backwardness of the electoral process

- relevance of party politics

You forgot to include rain.

[myata]

You forgot to include rain.

Not really, see #1.

As a matter of fact I've encountered this same attitude even among my friends. It's supposed to be a sign of coolness and sophistication, but in fact, is a misundertanding of a simple fact, that choice is always made, if not by us, then for us.

[capricorn]

I would add satisfaction with the status quo in those ridings where incumbents win with large pluralities. For example, in my riding the Liberal incumbent has been in office for over 10 years and his plurality is a consistent 10,000 votes. If I was a Liberal supporter, I'd feel safe staying at home.

I'm all for streamlining the processes that encourage and facilitate voters to present themselves to the polling booth. Elections Canada should have clearer guidelines regarding proper ID, widen its advertising of the rules to reach as many voters as possible and ensure the rules are applied uniformly.

I've heard in a number of cases, voters were turned away because they didn't have proper ID. I guarantee most of those voters gave up.

That said, IMO the voter turnout on October 14, although disappointing, does not spell the beginning of the end of democracy in Canada. I do think the system could be more voter friendly.

[myata]

I would add satisfaction with the status quo in those ridings where incumbents win with large pluralities. For example, in my riding the Liberal incumbent has been in office for over 10 years and his plurality is a consistent 10,000 votes. If I was a Liberal supporter, I'd feel safe staying at home.

That's a good point, and it ties up to into the comment about electoral system. If system allowed more choice, voters would be more likely to come out and vote for alternative parties. As of now, any vote cast against the dominant incumbent is as good as lost.

I'm all for streamlining the processes that encourage and facilitate voters to present themselves to the polling booth. Elections Canada should have clearer guidelines regarding proper ID, widen its advertising of the rules to reach as many voters as possible and ensure the rules are applied uniformly.

Maybe, but it's probably a smaller part of the problem. I received my card with detailed explanation of new rules at least a month before the election. Also, the trend with diminishing voter participation existed in several earlier elections, i.e. before new rules were introduced.

That said, IMO the voter turnout on October 14, although disappointing, does not spell the beginning of the end of democracy in Canada. I do think the system could be more voter friendly.

Some of the problems can be helped; I strongly believe that there should be an electoral reform with some form of proportional participation, and modernization of the process, for starters. Party politics will have to catch up to the times too. There's no cure for the lifestyle problem, this is something that we'll learn to survive through, or if not, it'll be something that eventually will bring us down, like Romans.

[GostHacked]

How many different choices are there for Queen? How many different possible outcomes, for who is Queen after voting day, do elections involve?

No elections for the Queen. By nature the Queen is part of a Monarchy, there is no vote.

The executive authority of and over Canada is vested in the Queen.

This was the case decades ago. The Queen is represented in Canada by the Govenor-General who right now is Michelle Jean. The Queen no longer has direct or any real control or power over Canada, it is a symbolic postion more or less now. The GG has all that power I would guess.

Is the act of voting considered to be giving voluntary implied consent to the idea that Elizabeth II is Queen?

No, she will be Queen either way. Part of the reason you are born into the Monarchy hierarchy. Outsiders can only get there through marriage.

[dpwozney]

No, she will be Queen either way.

Elizabeth the Second is not Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, contrary to the requirement in this Fifth Schedule, which states:

“Oath of Allegiance

I A.B. do swear, That I will be faithful and bear true Allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Victoria.

Note. The Name of the King or Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland for the Time being is to be substituted from Time to Time, with proper Terms of Reference thereto.”.

The provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick expressed their desire to be federally united into one Dominion under the Crown of the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland”, not the Crown of the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”, according to the British North America Act, 1867.

[lukin]

Heard an interesting though brief discussion of unsatisfactory voter participation record in this, and earlier elections on CBC radio this morning. While terms like apathy, fatigue, mistrust and uselessness were thrown around, it didn't quite strike me as the real core reason(s) of the problem. And of course, our new old PM has also spoken his concern about participation in the elections.

So what are the reasons for this phenomena? I can think of a few more specific causes, but not necessarily in the order of actual priority, rather from generality to specifics.

- idleness and laziness of population

As pointed out by some professor commenting on the discussion, and I agree that it constitutes an important element of the puzzle. It's generally characteristical of societies at the top of their life cycle, about to begin the descent. These societies prefer entertainment to stimulation, avoid taking serious decisions and challenges, if at all possible, and tend worry about their little things emuch more than what's going on around them. I'm pretty sure that it explains, at least in part, the notions of "apathy", "fatigue" and disinterest. Because if somebody spends principal part of their non-working time in entertaining themselves, I see how making a few minutes trip to the polling station, and tasking their brain to make a choice could be an impossibly fatigating task. Same goes for the "I don't care". Because not caring for important choices and/or events is also a symptom of mental laziness.

This is a major reason. Many people don't care about politics. Many people couldn't name the 4 major political parties. It's very sad, but I believe it's the truth.

- lack of real choice

But not all of it. The lack of meaningful choice in the existing system is a significant deterrent to participation in the electoral process. As in one of the headliness before the election, making a choice "Mr Mean vs cold turkey" does not sound like an interesting exciting undertaking. And in this age we do not like to task ourselves with less than exciting activities even if they represent a civil duty.

This is a weak argument.

- backwardness of the electoral process

Look at the progress of technology in the last couple of decades. We now have laptops, cellphones, and ubiquitous access to the Net; yet our electoral duty is still putting a cross on a piece of paper. This just does not cut it as something exciting, or even meaningful to do, especially for the younger audience, even if ... etc.

Yes, we need to make sure young voters are entertained for those 10 seconds they spend voting.

- relevance of party politics

Our communications have developed to the extent where we can have almost instant response to vertually any question or request. Not in party politics though, that still operates on "twice a year, once in four year" schedule. That just isn't fast enough for the new generations. Same goes for openness and transparency. Availability of information in multiple media and in near real time is still far from reality for most parties, that use the new media is the old fashioned dusty way, i.e. to promote their leadership, or blast opposition, rather than to open and discuss their position.

Find some media that is fair and balanced, and you'll find people more interested.

Edited October 16, 2008 by lukin

[mikedavid00]

Heard an interesting though brief discussion of unsatisfactory voter participation record in this, and earlier elections on CBC radio this morning

Yes I heard the very same thing also.

Of course, you forgot the last thing he mentioned which was manditory voting.

Look.

In life, in Canada, in the world... well again, IN LIFE, we have to do things that we don't want to do. Voting is the most important thing (more important than paying taxes almost).

Yes almost the MOST important thing is being given as an option?

We have to fill out a census. We have to attend jurry duty. We cannot speed over 15km/h.

The most OBVIOUS thing to enforce is voting. This ensures democracy. If 100% of people aren't voting, then special intrest are controlling the outcomes. Left or Right. (in Canada, as we all know, it's the left). I never realized this until..

Ok.. at work there were these two guys in accounting that were around 28 years old and thinking (nievely) that they could persway the outcome of ridings. So they made their way around work and spoke to people. Many to my suprise weren't voting! I'm talking the owners of the companies daughter and other white collars. They just don't care. Don't listen to the news.

But when questioned about 'do you want higher GST' = No. Do you want higher gas prices = No. They were tax paying conservatives but since they knew before hand they were NOT going to vote, they didn't CARE to EDUCATE themselves on the issues. Also, the ads were not geared towards them... they were too "Harpers doesn't have it right.. he doesn't get it' sort of ads. That does not resonate with them.

I hate to say, cutting $42 million from the 'arts' didn't resonate with anyone except some Quebec welfare cases who call themselves muscisions.

Unfortunately, a Quebec music awards show was aired, 2,000,000 households tuned in, and almost EVERY muscisian on stage ripped Harper saying he was a boogy man and out to destroy Quebec.

You have to realize. Our party platforms or so complicated that mainstreme voters do not get it and do not care.

Ok.. i'm only saying this because I'm tipsy right now.. wow.. this is hard for me to say.

The night before our election.. I was in the kitchen and my wife was making dinner.. I told her we were going to go out and vote and we discusses the ID and stuff (she's from MTL we just got married and doesn't have all her Ontario ID). So anyhow..

I was like 'who are you voting for'.... she pauses... and says 'whoever you want me to'.

I'm thinking what the hell is this? I've spent the last 5 years bitching about Martin, Dion, the GST, immigration, etc. etc.! Even her Dad has many articles published in the Montreal Gazette, National Post, and McLeans being anti Liberal etc.

So then I'm like.. "Who's the leader of the opposition!!" AND SHE COULDN'T ANSWER! And then I'm like 'WHO'S THE CURRENT PRIMINISTER!' And then she grinned and then walked out of the kitchen all emberassed and such. She was just kidding but still!

But she came back in later and said it was a 'Harper Minority'.

Then I said "Well who's the leader of the oposition". AND SHE COULDN'T ANSWER FOR REAL! She had no idea what either party stood for.

Now of course she knew the face when she was it. But she knew she wasn't going to vote so didn't care. As a women, she just doesn't care. I just called out her now and aksed her what she's watching in the living room and she's watching survivor. That's her intrest.

But I said look...

"Vote for who you want to. It's your choice. "

"The Liberals, we will have to pay more on gas. "

"The Conservatives, gas prices will stay the same and he might stop immigration."

It really is all this really comes down to. Not minority, majority, etc. etc.

What do you think her choice was? A private tax payer who works hard each day like myself.

But we both didn't bother voting. There was no point. Our rididng has been hijacked. We fealt alienated and like our vote didn't make a difference. There was an alien group of people from overseas who speak foriegn languages who banded together in their groups.. they vote one way together to pass the 50% mark that we have no control over. We knew it already and there was no point.......

And so did the house down the street, and the other, and the other... etc. etc. We all did't vote. But we support these groups financialy to come here.. all through no choice of our own.

What would happen if *ALL* the people came out and voted? All the 5 ppl at work that the conservatives lost votes.

Right now Canada is being controlled by special polticial interest and should no longer be.

Lets start manditory voting. If the gov't forces us to buy a licence to go fishing or we'll get a fine, they can SURELY do the same for something so important as voting.

Mrs. Struggling Tax Payer: Do you want higher GST and gas prices? Yes or No.

That's all this election really came down to. If everyone voted, I'm sure you know who the majority would have been. I'm sorry if people in Quebec don't pay taxes. In the rest of Canada we mostly do. And we support their sorry *sses.

[kengs333]

This was the case decades ago. The Queen is represented in Canada by the Govenor-General who right now is Michelle Jean. The Queen no longer has direct or any real control or power over Canada, it is a symbolic postion more or less now. The GG has all that power I would guess.

As a representative, Jean represents the authority of the Queen. It is not something that she gains and the Queen loses.

[kengs333]

While majoritarty system is certainly a factor in the problem, I doubt that it accounts for all of it. I'm all for a reform of electoral system with some form of PR, but I also think that other aspects of the problem should not be forgotten.

Maybe if we had a political climate that allowed for equal representation of all parties in the media and no political polls throughout the campaign to groom voters, then maybe people would be more willing to participate and vote.

[myata]

Yes I heard the very same thing also.

Of course, you forgot the last thing he mentioned which was manditory voting.

Indeed it was strongly advocated by the aforementioned professor. I didn't think of it as a much of a solution, but now that you mentioned it, perhaps it's indeed worthy of noticing. Perhaps I shouldn't have made this omission.

As a matter of fact, even our PM himself made some comments about the issue, and if any solution they'll come up with, I wouldn't be suprised if some sort of mandatory would be a part of it. Indeed, it's so like these, i.e. Harper's concervatives. Forget about analysing the problem, establishing reasons, addressing root causes; get a quick easy "make them do it, or else" band aid solution. That wouldn't surprise me at all because it would be exact same approach they're taking toward the crime problem (don't think about the causes, hit hard on symptoms), and it would have as much chances of success. But that wouldn't matter, right? - because solving problems is the last thing these policies are intended to do. In the meanwhile drawing attention, and distracting from a needed action to address the real causes: restrictive and backward electoral system, out of touch party politics, etc.

[guyser]

Voting is the most important thing (more important than paying taxes almost).

I see.....held in such high esteem that...

But we both didn't bother voting.

Any other words of wisdom we can take from you?

Why , it is so important to you that you repeat it...

The most OBVIOUS thing to enforce is voting. This ensures democracy. If 100% of people aren't voting, then special intrest are controlling the outcomes. Left or Right. (in Canada, as we all know, it's the left). I never realized this until..

..until ..

-it rained

-Oprah/Dr Phil was over

-couldnt find your pants

-couldnt find the clown makeup remover

-stubbed your toe

It has been said people marry on par with their station in life. Congrats on your marriage.

The night before our election.. I was in the kitchen and my wife was making dinner..

I was like 'who are you voting for'.... she pauses... and says 'whoever you want me to'.

[cybercoma]

This time around, Liberals all over Canada did not support Dion. Instead of voting for the only real alternative, the Conservatives, and potentially giving Harper a majority government, they stayed home. The other choices on the left are the NDP and Green Party, which are too "procrustean" (to steal a term from Jeffrey Simpson) for a Liberal voter to support.

[dpwozney]

The Queen is represented in Canada by the Govenor-General who right now is Michelle Jean.

The Governor General of Canada is a “corporation sole”, according to Elizabeth the Second in this document. A “corporation sole” is defined and recognized as being a corporation.

It is a fiction that a corporation is a person. “A corporation is a fiction, by definition, ...”, according to Patrick Healy in a statement found in evidence provided to the Canadian Parliament's Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in 2002. “A corporation is a ‘fiction’ as it has no separate existence, no physical body and no ‘mind’”, according to Joanne Klineberg in a presentation to the Canadian Aviation Safety Seminar in 2004.

[M.Dancer]

I wonder if he's confusing soul with sole?

Edited October 23, 2008 by M.Dancer

[Mr.Canada]

Nothing is wrong with voter participation.

If people feel they have better things to do than vote then I'd rather them not vote. Vote, don't vote who cares honestly?