Does Technology Offer an Alternative?

[CanadaRocks]

Try another example: the provincial premier approves of a new power plant. Environmentalists go nuts and the people vote him out of office next month. The power plant doesn't get built, and next summer the province loses $2 billion worth of business because of blackouts and the economy sheds 20,000 jobs.

The examples you provide are valid. In fact I strongly suspect that if we do adopt such a system, the Canadian public may make an expensive error or two while we adjust to our new sense of control over our destiny.

That being said, it is also true that we will learn from each experience. We will learn that with power comes responsibility and accountability. Further, if we the Canadian People do make such an error, who is it that suffers? We do. When we the Canadian People make such a choice that brings great reward? Who benefits? We do.

Will we learn from our experiences to use our powers of control wisely and with discretion? I suspect we shall indeed. Canadian voters are not mentally challenged children who cannot act responsibly and therefore must have a responsible adult to make our every decision, or at least, thats not how I see my fellow Canadians.

I find it truely amazing, that fellow forum members have such a dismal view of the ability of our fellow Canadians to act with discretion and intelligence.

If we cannot intelligently be trusted to decide when our Prime Minister or Member of Parliament has betrayed our faith in them, then how can we be be trusted which of them to vote into power to safeguard our interests?

Perhaps we should have voting rights for all Canadians in general rescinded, and have those in power who know whats good for us, vote to pick their own successors? This does sound like its in line with the logic members have presented thus far.

[Hugo]

In fact I strongly suspect that if we do adopt such a system, the Canadian public may make an expensive error or two while we adjust to our new sense of control over our destiny.

What if they never adjust? What if the man-on-the-street isn't as politically inclined or well-informed as your average politician, although you say he is?

I find it truely amazing, that fellow forum members have such a dismal view of the ability of our fellow Canadians to act with discretion and intelligence.

It's pretty much impossible to act with discretion and intelligence when you don't know anything about what you are opining on. I'm a fairly intelligent guy, but any opinion I offer on quantum mechanics is utterly useless and stupid because I don't know the first thing about it.

Similarly, your ideas merely give more power to the average citizen without addressing the need for the intelligence and discretion required to exercise it properly. As I said before, teaching of politics and economics in schools would do far more.

I think we all know that Canadians, as a people, understand very little of the issues they are voting on. People on this website are a little different, they are what's colloquially termed "political junkies" and know a thing or two. The man on the street, though, is terribly ignorant on modern politics and economics, and those subjects are mostly counter-intuitive and defeat so-called common sense.

Your answer to that problem is not to give them more knowledge, just to give them more power. That's akin to putting firearms in the hands of children and likely to be about as destructive to our political system.

I'm not being insulting to the average man. Most people have at least one field in which they are well-informed and knowledgeable, but usually that field isn't politics. It's just a human failing. People are not computers who can be stuffed with virtually limitless amounts of information and remain capable of recalling and applying it perfectly.

[CanadaRocks]

ya know? if our politicians are highly educated in the issues that surround our lives, so much so indeed that none of us could possibly make as informed a decision to reflect our best interests as a people... then umm.. how come no two politicians ever agree and each feel that only their answer is the right one?

don't believe this man boyz n girlz, politicians pull their pants on one leg at a time just like you or I, they are not Gods

but, the next time we're told that we are so broke we need to close our hospitals, water down our social programs, or let foriegners run our business's, or institute a tax increase that takes from the poor and gives to the rich.. don't be upset, no.. no instead, remember the wisdom of Hugo's words

I think we all know that Canadians, as a people, understand very little of the issues they are voting on.

and send your politician a great big donation and note of thanks and tell him Hugo sent ya

[August1991]

politicians pull their pants on one leg at a time just like you or I, they are not Gods

Good expression, you're right.

how come no two politicians ever agree and each feel that only their answer is the right one?

Gee whiz, Canada Rocks, how come?

First: I have a friend who is an excellent proofreader/editor. She has figured out computers (sort of) and the Internet. If she was told that she had to vote on-line, she would be offended. Worse. She hires a mechanic to fix her car. I'm sure the mechanic pulls her pants on one leg at a time - yes, my friend insisted on finding a woman mechanic - but that's not the point. We hire other people to do special things for us: Politicians figure stuff out and then decide on our behalf. Like a mechanic.

Second: There are several flaws in democracy but I'll note only one of them. In a large society, my vote (your vote) WILL CHANGE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. CanadaRocks, admit it. Whether your one single ballot, your X on your piece of paper, is in the box or not, it will make absolutely no difference to Canada's Parliament or Government. Your single vote is irrelevant - paper, proportional voting, Internet - makes no difference. If you don't vote, the result will be the same. (Don't believe me? Check after the next election to see if your vote changed anything.)

[Boydfish]

My suggestion on electoral reform for the Canadian's confederation would be part of the reform of the Senate into a EEE Senate.

Each province's senators would be elected in the same way as the House of Commons, every four years. The difference would be that each person's vote would be retractable.

In basic terms, it means that a person can "un-vote", or retract, their vote for their senator anytime during the term. This retraction could be via signed letter or even via an on-line format. Once "retracted", the vote is withdrawn from the total that the elected senator got. A person cannot retract and then return their vote; it's a one way deal.

If the sitting senator's total support drops below the next highest vote getter's total in the previous election, the seat is declared vacant and a by-election is held.

The idea is that it would prevent senators from having radical reversals, either sudden or slowly, from continuing to serve in a capacity that the people did not want.

The average voter is only going to make this effort when there is good reason to do so. For example, if the senator suddenly changed parties(Like happened in Richmond's seat in the HoC, where Joe Peschi-dill-hole betrayed British Columbians by abandoning the Alliance and joining the Canadian Liberals), the voters could easily "reclaim" their vote and support.

The key point of maintaining long term stability is also there: The senators would be able to make long term plans, but not ones that are not supported by those who elected them.

[Hugo]

and send your politician a great big donation and note of thanks and tell him Hugo sent ya

Nice attitude.

then umm.. how come no two politicians ever agree and each feel that only their answer is the right one?

Probably because we elect them, and the people who do the electing don't agree with each other either. People vote for politicians who share their views, so politicians are as diverse as people.

[Hugo]

Each province's senators would be elected in the same way as the House of Commons, every four years. The difference would be that each person's vote would be retractable.

That sounds like a much better idea to me. It makes a genuine attempt to bind politicians to their election promises, but doesn't force the electorate to become steeped in politics when they have no real wish to be.

[CanadaRocks]

Retractable vote concept, interesting. Could we apply this to MP's and even the PM?

[August1991]

Retractable vote concept, interesting.

But then the vote would not be anonymous. In the current system, no one knows how any individual voted. I think this is important for the long term survival of democracy.

[CanadaRocks]

y'know, I dunno, I used to think that voting anonyminity was a really good way, simply because it can to a degree prevent retaliation.

As time passes tho, and I see more and more of what I consider to be travesties of justice happening, I at times feel offended that people assume no responsibility for those we place in power.

There's a lot of room for debate about the pros and cons of retractable votes vs anonyminity with valid points on both sides. Its even possible that there might be a way to have the best of both worlds. Nothing in this world we can ever do is truly anonymus is it?