Crossing the Floor

[YankAbroad]

Why is "crossing the floor" so dishonest?

People elect representatives, not parties.

Further, if crossing the floor is such a dishonest and misleading thing to do that it should result in an immediate byelection, shouldn't abandonment of major campaign planks or lying about policies as part of the campaign also result in a byelection? If that's the standard, there'd be a byelection every week.

I agree with those who say the voters should decide in the next election.

[Black Dog]

Why is "crossing the floor" so dishonest?

People elect representatives, not parties.

But those representatives are from parties, and usually, people vote for that representative because of the party's platform or values (which are generallly shared by the candidate). Let's put it this way: say you buy a Toyota, but thew dealership delivers a Chevy. While they are both cars, it's not what you paid for. Vancouver's voters picked a Liberal and got a Conservative instead. Why shouldn't they be allowed to take it back?

[YankAbroad]

If parties are so important then, why not eliminate individual candidates altogether?

Just let people vote for parties, and then have the party assign the ridings it wins to whichever of its members it so chooses.

[tml12]

If parties are so important then, why not eliminate individual candidates altogether?

Just let people vote for parties, and then have the party assign the ridings it wins to whichever of its members it so chooses.

Parties are becoming so unimportant I think.

Not that the Liberals ever were a party, more like an unhappy honeymoon between the NDP and Conservatives.

[Wilber]

The problem is we have an electoral system premised on representation from the individual MP, whereas by operation it has become representation by the party the MP belongs to.

So long as we have such brutal party discipline, this should be outlawed without facing the voters. The answer to this dilemna though is not in outlawing crossing the floor, it is in moving away from the this hopelessly inflexible system to one more in line with the US where partisanship plays much less of a role.

In theory, partisanship would play less of a role. But it hardly seems that way in the United States...

When it comes to the way representatives vote, partisanship does play less of a role in the US. Checking an incumbents voting record at election time is important in the US. It means next to nothing in Canada.

[Hicksey]

I believe that with parties moving left and right to try to get voters, that some politicians will find themselves sitting within parties they don't feel they fit properly within. Having said that, I do not believe that any MP should be able to defect directly from one party to another. However, if an MP does feel so strongly that the party they now repesent has left them behind they should be able to sit as an independent until the next election at which time they can make a choice and run under that party's banner. The only way an MP should be able to sit as a member of a party is if they were elected under it.

[Kincora]

If parties are so important then, why not eliminate individual candidates altogether?

Just let people vote for parties, and then have the party assign the ridings it wins to whichever of its members it so chooses.

But, on the flip side, you cannot ignore the parties all together. It has to be a balance of all three, and I think when a candidate crosses the floor, it spoils that balance.

As I have read here, there are definately some good reasons why a candidate could and even should defect form his party, with parties moving left and right to garner votes.

But let's be honest, how often does that happen? How often is that only pretense for mask personal political ambition?

Some of you say that voters canwait until the next election to display our dissatisfaction. But why can't the candidates wait until the election to jump ship?

[Black Dog]

If parties are so important then, why not eliminate individual candidates altogether?

Just let people vote for parties, and then have the party assign the ridings it wins to whichever of its members it so chooses.

Why go to extremes?

[shoop]

Great point BD. It doesn't have to be that cut and dried. There is room for compromises in the system.

Elimination of candidates is insane. You could get absolute nutbars in the House on that basis. Heck, enough nutbars get in under the current system. How much worse would the problem be with this well-considered alternative?

If parties are so important then, why not eliminate individual candidates altogether?

Just let people vote for parties, and then have the party assign the ridings it wins to whichever of its members it so chooses.

Why go to extremes?

[Black Dog]

Elimination of candidates is insane. You could get absolute nutbars in the House on that basis. Heck, enough nutbars get in under the current system. How much worse would the problem be with this well-considered alternative?

Yeah you'd hate to end up with a system where unelected party hacks get apppointed to positions of prominence.

Oh wait.

Nuts.

[Hicksey]

If parties are so important then, why not eliminate individual candidates altogether?

Just let people vote for parties, and then have the party assign the ridings it wins to whichever of its members it so chooses.

Why go to extremes?

That's right. How could we hold individual MPs accountable on election day that way?

[crazymf]

crazy,

More of an Albertan's only post ... but here is a quick answer for you.

Nancy Betkowski

After she lost the leadership to Klein she didn't run in the next election. She came back later and ran as a Liberal. That is totally fine as she never changed parties *while* sitting as an MLA. Whenever she was elected she represented the party she was elected for.

A person crossing the floor has just ripped off the voting public. They should be fired and prevented from participating in public office ever again. I wouldn't ever knowingly vote for someone who had crossed.

The notable in my memory is Nancy Betkowski.

Yes I remember. I knew Nancy and Stephan Betkowski in the 80's on a personal level. While she did not cross the floor in the same sense as this thread, she still left one party to join another simply to stay in politics. That puts her personal convictions at question to me. I wouldn't trust a person like that.

[Spike22]

Sure they can cross dress, I mean cross the floor. Politicians you should know are absolute liars and don't give a crap about party loyalty as long as they get a great position. The main purpose is getting and keeping power after all. Ethics by a polititcian of any stripe is laughable.

[sage]

What is it that makes partisnship less likely in the US system? Is it just convention?

[geoffrey]

What is it that makes partisnship less likely in the US system? Is it just convention?

And the fact that the government does't fall if a bill fails.

The parlimentary system requires strict partisanship, other it completely fails to function.

[Wilber]

What is it that makes partisnship less likely in the US system? Is it just convention?

No, it is the fact that representatives and the head of government are elected separately. The President is not the party leader in the same sense as a Prime Minister. He cannot discipline members of the Senate or Congress and he cannot try to control them by offering rewards such as Cabinet posts. In short, they do not owe their positions to him in any way.

[sage]

I agree with both your comments to an extent, though in Canada there is nothing specifically preventing someone from disagreeing with party lines, being punted from cabinet, and running as an independent except the distaste of the electorate.

There must be some difference though when it comes to the nomination process for candidates in the US, otherwise the party leadership would have a veto over the local nominees and exercise the same control as in Canada.

[shoop]

If Martin's talk about ameliorating the democratic deficit would have been more than talk a lot of these problems would have been dealt with.

We will have to see if Harper can get through his five priorities first, but there might be some movement on electoral reform. We know that is what Jack is demanding.

[Wilber]

I agree with both your comments to an extent, though in Canada there is nothing specifically preventing someone from disagreeing with party lines, being punted from cabinet, and running as an independent except the distaste of the electorate.

There must be some difference though when it comes to the nomination process for candidates in the US, otherwise the party leadership would have a veto over the local nominees and exercise the same control as in Canada.

The President does not have the same power within his party as our Prime Minister. He does not sign anyones nomination papers. He must be nominated and elected on his own. The US Cabinet is made up of unelected appointees of the President. He cannot punt anyone other than his own appointees. The Senate and Congress appoint their own house leaders, the President has nothing to do with it. It is this separation of powers that makes their system fundamentally different from ours.

[shoop]

That's a very interesting analysis. Perhaps, she saw no room for herself in a Klein cabinet. After leaving politics she came back under another party. Her actions were far different from those of Emerson, Stronach, and Brison.

Very different. The very fair objections people have to somebody crossing the floor while sitting in a legislative body is one thing. To change your mind and come back for another party is all together different. People do change their minds some times.

Yes I remember. I knew Nancy and Stephan Betkowski in the 80's on a personal level. While she did not cross the floor in the same sense as this thread, she still left one party to join another simply to stay in politics. That puts her personal convictions at question to me. I wouldn't trust a person like that.

[crazymf]

I guess it's just my personal belief that a politician will only really do his/her best when the convictions they hold dear to their heart are out there on their sleeve for everyone to see. The attitude nowadays seems to be to hold your job at an armslength away from your real self. That makes you a slut to your job and really not deserving of being in public office.

There's not too many politicians (ie real leader types) that I respect but here's a few.

Ralph (of course)

Mayor Bill Hawrylak of Edmonton

GWB

John McCain

John Kennedy

Ed Broadbent

Joe Clark

Don Getty was the worst premier Alberta has ever seen, imo.

[geoffrey]

I guess it's just my personal belief that a politician will only really do his/her best when the convictions they hold dear to their heart are out there on their sleeve for everyone to see. The attitude nowadays seems to be to hold your job at an armslength away from your real self. That makes you a slut to your job and really not deserving of being in public office.

There's not too many politicians (ie real leader types) that I respect but here's a few.

Ralph (of course)

Mayor Bill Hawrylak of Edmonton

GWB

John McCain

John Kennedy

Ed Broadbent

Joe Clark

Don Getty was the worst premier Alberta has ever seen, imo.

We are in complete agreement on what makes a leader a leader. People that actually stand for their beliefs and don't sell out to political expediency or benifet. I'd add to my list:

Jimmy Carter

(one of the great people that have ever lived, he should be cannonized)

Lester B. Pearson

(right up there too, if only Canadian's would remember his dreams, and have his comittment to service, put his life where his mouth was, something not many other Canadian politicans have ever done)

Brian Mulroney

(he did what needed to be done, even if it cost him his government, kicking and screaming)

I don't agree with GWB, I don't think he's actually all that bright himself (not stupid, but not a genius). He's not earthshattering in his views on the world either.

John McCain is a bit of a kook, not on a top 25 list anyways.

Don't know this mayor so I can't comment.

[crazymf]

Yes ok. However, GWB and John McCain have their agenda out there and haven't been changing parties lately. I respect that, but the difference is I agree with their agendas more than you.

Agreed to be in disagreement on that, but these 2 guys are focused and clear, and make my point just the same.

[tml12]

CRAZYMF: I don't know the Edmonton mayor on that list, but of all the people listed there I would agree that McCain is my favourite leader. He tells it like it is, regardless of party affiliation.

GEOFFREY: I disagree with you about Carter and McCain. I like McCain and as for Carter, he has done a lot through Habitat For Humanity, etc. and I respect that. But, perhaps as Black Dog's Orwell quote illustrates, he did not put human rights as a forefront on his national agenda as he should have.

BLACKDOG: This is where I pose the question to you. Remember when the former PM Paul Martin had the Chinese President here a few months ago and all the papers throughout Canada kept asking the question "do you think we should recognize Hu Jiantao (spelling?) here in Canada because of his human rights abuses, etc. Well, according to your Orwell quote, the only reason we in the west (regardless of left or right-wing) government ignore foreign government's human rights abuses is because we enjoy trading, etc. rights in these countries. Well, then the question asked should be: "would like to shop in Dollarama and get average quality things for $1.00 or would you rather have to shop in Linen Chest and great really expensive things for their really expensive made in USA or made in Canada price?

I am sorry, but even if the Canadian left-wing got into power, they would govern just like the American left-wing (Jimmy Carter) did...ignore human rights abuses in other parts of the world to ensure that people here enjoy getting cheap made-in-Chine things from their local discount store...

[shoop]

I find it amazing how much more left-wing some of these *left-wing* U.S. politicians act once they are out of office.

Take an honest look at what Clinton did in office, or what Gore campaigned to do. You will find them to be a lot closer to the CPC than either of them would admit now.

I am sorry, but even if the Canadian left-wing got into power, they would govern just like the American left-wing (Jimmy Carter) did...ignore human rights abuses in other parts of the world to ensure that people here enjoy getting cheap made-in-Chine things from their local discount store...