Flanagan’s Status Quo In 1988 abortion legislation was abolished by the supreme court of Canada (Flanagan 120). Current law was deemed to violate a women’s “security of person” under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Wikipedia). Drafting and passing abortion legislation became the responsibility of the current Prime Minister and the House of Commons (Flanagan 121). Attempts by Brian Mulroney to introduce abortion legislation into the House of Commons and senate failed repeatedly (Flanagan 121). ) Despite public opinion favoring moderate legislation, abortion in Canada remains unlegislated (Flanagan 121).Under the circumstances stated why does Canadian abortion law remain in a state of limbo? In Game Theory and Canadian Politics Thomas Flanagan attempts to elucidate this seeming anomaly in Canadian politics. Firstly, the inability to pass new legislation is explained by the tendency for the status quo to prevail when a “cyclical opinion structure”(Flanagan 121) is present in the legislating body (Flanagan 121). Secondly, Flanagan (121) emphasizes how parliamentary outcomes are influenced by the procedures with which legislation is passed. These two points are illuminated and analyzed using aspects of game theory. Rational choice theory is used to analyze the parliamentary procedure and cyclical opinion structure that caused all possible resolutions and amendments introduced into the House of Commons to fail. Than, the game of chicken and extensive form games are introduced to explicate bill C-43’s majority vote in the House of Commons and subsequent failure in the senate. Although enlightening, Flanagan’s analysis lacks in-depth explanations and pertinent aspects of game theory. He comments on the vote’s failure t... ... middle of paper ... ...the outcome is seen to mirror real life events. Finally, certain aspects of Flanagan’s sequential game model were critiqued and found deficient. Although Flanagan’s case study was enlightening, some aspects may be flawed and an enhanced analysis farther explicates the phenomenon of the “staying power of the status quo.” Works Cited Abortion in Canada." Wikipedia. 01 Apr.-May 2007 . Brams, Steven J. Rational Politics. Washinton, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1985. Flanagan, Thomas. Game Theory and Canadian Politics. Toronto: University of Toronoto Press, 1999. Gates, Scott, and Brian D. Humes. Games, Information and Politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1997. Green, Donald P., and Ian Shapiro. Pathologies of Rational Choice. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1994.
Heller, Joseph. "Chapter 21." Catch-22. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2004. 210. Print.
Malcolmson, P., & Myers, R. (2009). The Canadian Regime: An Introduction to Parliamentary Government in Canada (4th ed.). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
Making in the Pre-Cloture Senate.” American Journal of Political Science 48 (2004): 758-74. JSTOR. Web. 17 Mar. 2014.
Walter M. Simon The American Political Science Review , Vol. 45, No. 2 (Jun., 1951), pp. 386-399
D’Agostino concludes that formalism interpreted through the dichotomization thesis does not provide a satisfactory account of games (p. 12). These specific examples even further support this conclusion by identifying regulative rules that do in fact have a role in defining a game.
Even back in 1892 when Canada was much more conservative and Christian compared to today, there was many reports of women seeking abortions and upset due to the first Canadian Criminal Code that prohibits abortion and the sales, distribution and advertising of contraceptives. However this made sense due to Christian values. As Canada progressed and its culture changed, this law was considered outdated and was changed in 1969, contraceptives were allowed but abortions could only be performed under special circumstances. Many Canadians, particularly women and feminists disagreed with this law and believed it should be their own decision, not someone else and so many protests, petitions and illegal abortion clinics began, particularly by Dr. Henry Morgentaler. In the 1980’s most Canadians were pro-choice as a Gallup poll showed that 72% of Canadians believed that an abortion decision should only be decided by the pregnant woman and her doctor. By 1988, as previously mentioned, the law was abolished and all abortion restrictions removed. Now, there is talks of a law again yet Canadians have very mixed views on abortion whereas before 72% of Canadians wanted a change. The country must educate themselves more before a change is made to avoid the unrest it had before 1988. Many believe there should be restrictions to limit abortions in Canada yet compared to other democratic countries with abortion restrictions like Australia, France, Sweden, the United Kingdom, excluding Ireland, and the United States have higher abortion rates per 1000 women between 15-44 years old than Canada according to Maclean's. Canada has had much more issues when abortion laws than it has had without them. There isn’t a clear majority supporting a specific change like last time and the restrictions aren’t needed anyways as there are no problems. Canada does not need abortion
Abortion has been a subject of controversy over the past century. Eventually the decision was settled in favor of pro-choice, in the Supreme Court case Roe versus Wade. At 10:00 a.m. on January 22,1973, the United States Supreme Court announced that the Texas abortion law was unconstitutional. The Court also declared the Georgia abortion law unacceptable. The vote was seven to two, with Burger, Blackmun, Powell, Stewart, Brennan, Douglas, and Marshall in the majority. Rehnquist and White opposed the decision. Abortion throughout the nation had been declared legal. Abortion laws in thirty-one states, including Texas, were overturned. Fifteen states, including Georgia, would have to rewrite their more liberal laws. Three other states, Hawaii, Washington, and Alaska-where rigid abortion laws had been repealed-had residency requirements or other limits that would have to be eliminated. Only the New York law, which allowed abortion without restrictions, was unaffected by the decision (Gold69).
Abortion continues to be a controversial topic now forty years after the U.S. Supreme Court found it to be a fundamental right in the historic Roe vs. Wade decision. Much of the debate claims to be founded upon scientific or constitutional issues. When examined closely this is just not true.
Roll call votes, number of bills signed and the numbers of presidential vetoes present an interesting method of measuring success. They are quantitative in nature and present a statistical relationship . As Dr. Whitlock put it: “There is a reason Americans prefer football over soccer – we love score. “ Although focus on success is frequent and relatively easy to measure, some scholars including (Collier 1959) have argued that it fails to capture the full picture surrounding the passage of a piece of legislation. For example, as (Collier 1959) remarked, the passage of a piece of legislation signed by the president may be different than the original bill introduced in the Congress. Yet, the president can still claim political victory after the bill passes. In addition, during divided government, when party control is divided between the branches, success in terms of outcomes measures may fail to capture the full picture of which player was really preventing the objective of the
Kernell, Samuel, Jacobson, Gary C., Kousser, Thad, & Vavreck, Lynn. 2014. The Logic of American Politics 6th ed. Los Angeles: CQ Press
Choice, what is choice? Choice is the right, power, or opportunity to choose. Everybody in society has a choice and these choices have many outcomes. A woman’s right to choose to have an abortion or not, is her fundamental right. If society outlaws abortion, society is interfering with the woman’s right to make decisions related to her own body. Many theorists believe that sexuality is what divides women from men and makes women less valuable than men; keeping this concept in mind it can be said that gender plays an immense role in social inequality. In one of Thomas Jefferson’s speeches, he explains how we should never put at risk our rights because our freedom can be next. (lp. org 2007) Roe.V .Wade is believed to have been the United States Supreme Court’s decision that resulted in the dawn of the abortion controversy between pro-choice and pro-life advocates, and whether what the woman is carrying is simply just a fetus or a life, the debate is endless. The social-conflict theory reflects the inequality women face regarding abortion in society which brings about a negative change. If a woman’s right to choose would be taken from her then this would cause social inequity. Taking a women’s right to choose would mean taking her freedom and taking freedom away from any human being would imply inequality.
As one knows, some unwanted pregnancies could often be harmful and distressing for a woman. Women should have the right over their body to choose to sustain the fetus or not. In the past decades, women did not have their freedom of abortion in many countries of the world. There have always been controversies going on about abortion. Each individual has dissimilar views on the legality of abortion. Some people are against abortion for personal religious purposes and beliefs. For those who don’t believe in abortion, it is because they see it as killing a fetus, which is a human being. Others support abortion because they believe in women’s rights. Laws of abortion vary in each country, and abortion is not legal all over the world. It is illegal under any conditions but only permitted to save woman’s life if in countries such as Brazil, Nigeria, United Arab Emirates, and Ireland. However, abortion is legal without any restrictions in countries like Canada, Albania, and Italy. It the past decades Abortion was considered as criminal act in Canada. “If an abortion was carried out without such approval, the woman was liable for imprisonment for 2 years, an...
There are a lot of debates surrounding the term, “Abortion.” Some believe that abortion is a choice, while others groups like conservatives believe that it is a Sin, and should be illegal. Individuals have their own reasons to why they want to get an abortion, and that should not be limited by legislators. Abortion should be legal because it is the individual right whether to have a baby or not regardless of their situation. The second reason is in the case of rape and incest, the third reason is, whether the individual is capable of caring for the baby.
Rational choice theory, developed by Ronald Clarke and Derek Cornish in 1985, is a revival of Cesare Becca...
Vertinsky, Ilan . Sauder School of Business, "Political Risk and Political Risk Assessment - Strategy & Business ." Last modified 2014. strategy.sauder.ubc.ca/vertinsky/baim502/lecture08.ppt.