We are in the last days going into the May 12th provincial election here in BC.
I thought I’d share some final thoughts…
Vote Here (flickr credit: myJon)
If you care about the environment, and have concerns about the unbalanced power held by corporations, especially in light of what appears to be the Liberal agenda to sell out public infrastructure / legacies to corporations, then you should definately watch the video here: http://www.callingfromthecoast.com
In the last election I Did not vote Liberal because they basically said “You don’t want the dishonest NDP do you?”, and I didn’t vote NDP because they basically said “We hate everything the Liberals stand for”, so I voted Green because they spoke of a triple bottom line of Economic, Ecological and social responsibility. It was the freshest thing I had heard in Canadian politics since the Reform party was formed.
This election, I think I must stop the Liberals who seem to want to sell everything they can to greedy corporations. BC-rail, BC-Hydro transmission, BC-Gas, BC-Tel… “What does it profit a man to gain the world and lose his soul?” There is more to life and government than money. Much more. Justice, compassion, vision, planning, responsibility, leadership, inovation. Money? come on some of the things being sold are irreplacible.
I’m not impressed with the green party this election, because our local candidate keeps mentioning the legalization of marajuana on par with other issues. Serious hit to your credibility guys. THAT green agenda is something entirely different than the one I’m concerned with.
This leaves me with the NDP. I don’t think their record is much worse than the Liberals, and when I look at the Millenium line and much of the provincial land reserves, the NDP deserve full credit.
The only thing I’m excited about this election is the STV, the “BC-STV” to be precise. After researching it, I’ve now blogged about BC-STV here, and here.
1. At the polling station you mark your choices 1,2,3,4…. instead of marking an X by only one candidate.
2. Your riding or electoral district is joined with others to contain more than one MLA. (same total number of MLAs)
3. Your vote goes to your first choice. If there is a surplus of votes for that candidate, or if that candidate is eliminated, then your second choice comes into play (and so on). Your vote goes farther. The BC Citizens Assembly on electoral reform explains this in detail in their website. Read their PDF “how the votes are counted”
BC-STV gives British Columbia the opportunity to have proportional representation in the legislature. It will likely weaken the “2 party pendulum effect” we have been seeing where policy swings far to the left and far to the right. This should lead to more moderate and stable government policy. This should reduce the party rhetoric because MLAs are going to have to work WITH each other.
By the way “The Corporation” is pretty much required viewing if you want to be informed about the world around you. Check out the copy at your local library.
Cheers friends, make me proud, vote for BC-STV and give that first video a watch.
Greg.
I wrote about the BC-STV the other day. I continue to learn more good things about STV and am determined to do my part in informing other voters in my sphere of influence so they can make an informed choice on May 12th.
I heard some really compelling arguments in favour of the STV written by Arthur here: http://Ansak.blogspot.com
And today in the paper “Dave” from Castlegar BC offered a letter comparing First Past the Post (FPTP) with Single Transferable Vote (STV):
… First past the Post:
Fails to accurately reflect voter’s choices (percentage of votes case is not accurately represented by seats in government)
Allows a minortity of votes to elect majority governments
Restricts new parties and independent candidates from fair competition
Entrenches power in established political parties
Narrows voter choice <not wanting to “waste votes”>
Single Transferable Vote:
Accurately reflects voters choices by seats in government
ensures that majority governements are not formed without a morjoity of voter support
Allows new parties and independent candidates to fairly compete
Increases voter choice.
As a footnote Dave went on to mention that in Ireland where STV is used, the politicians held two referendums in an effort to get rid of STV and both times the public voted to keep it. As more people become educated about STV, its support increases…
Vote with me on May 12 2009 to implement the “Single Transferable Vote” and redeem the opportunity of a lifetime to improve your democracy in a significant way.
British Columbians have a unique opportunity to improve the quality of our electoral system on May 12th when our province holds its next provincial election. Under the slogan “Power up the vote”, the BC Citizen’s Assembly is advocating the “Single Transferable Vote” this may be the single most significant opportunity to improve how we vote. Their website tries to anticipate and answer questions about the STV.
The Citizen’s Assembly was charged with making a recommendation directly to the citizens of BC, to improve our voting system. through a process detailed on their website, the BC Citizen’s Assembly determined that the BC-STV system would bring us the most advantages.
Current system
In British Columbia currently there is the system of “first past the pole” the candidate with the most votes wins. Truly it is the simplest system, but upon comparison with other options it is clearly far from perfect. Consider a hypothetical situation with the current system where in a riding there were 4 candidates each receiving 24%, 24%, 25% and 27% of the vote. It is clear that the candidate with 27% of the vote is the winner. However, it is also clear that 73% of the votes were “wasted” / “unrepresented in government” and that the majority of voters preferred someone other than the winner. Here is how the BC Citizen’s Assembly put it…
British Columbians believe that it isn’t fair that a party can form government without having the most votes, or that our province could be left without an official opposition – even if we voted for one. We don’t think its fair that a party can govern as if it had majority support when it doesn’t, or that a majority of votes do not elect anybody, or that some regions may have no representation in government at all.
Regardless of how we vote, British Columbians think elections should be about fair results, greater choice, effective local representation and accountable government.
Basically you only get to vote once, but your vote is more powerful. If you picked a losing candidate, your vote keeps on working to better represent your vote. Check out the 4.5 minute video below. It is brilliant.
Why is there another referendum after the one held in 2005?
In the referendum in May 2005, STV received 57.7% of the total vote and a clear majority in 77 of 79 electoral districts. Although it far exceeded the first bar of receiving majority support in at least 48 constituencies, it narrowly missed the second unprecedented 60% province wide threshold. Clearly this created a problem because only 42.3% supported retaining the current system. Given the results it was entirely appropriate that the people of BC be further more opportunity to explore STV. The question will be put to all the voters in BC in a second referendum, held on May 12, 2009, in conjunction with the next provincial election. If the voters clearly endorse the Citizens’ Assembly’s recommendation, the government has promised it will introduce legislation so that the new electoral system could be in place for the following provincial election in May 2013. http://www.bc-stv.ca/
Vote for the BC-STV
From what I’ve learned in my research, the BC-STV is an improvement that would give British Columbian voters better representation by popular vote. It seems like a brilliant idea, let me encourage you to;
1. Vote for the BC -STV on May 19th 12th. [Updated, Thanks!]
2. Explain the BC-STV to at least 3 other eligible voters so they can be informed.
Happy Voting! Oh, and check out these related videos on Proportional Representation featuring John Cleese and one of the Royal Canadian Air Farce: https://stv.ca/humour
Greg.
3000 square kilometersof forest in British Columbia have been infested with the pine beetle since 1997.
there is little discussion about why this is happening, only an accelerated logging program for the dead trees. No emphasis on prevention, and the strange media announcement that the beetle infested wood is desirable. Weird. Sounds like ostriches with their heads in the sand if you ask me. 300,000 hectares of trees killed, and we aren’t asking why?
corporate denial? Government obliviousness (new word?) sounds like a plague, and if I know my history, plagues were always sent as warnings, and people experiencing plagues stopped what they were doing and tried to figure out how they could mend their ways.
Quality In Life - Living Smarter... 