Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Similarities between dictatorship and democracy
Similarities between dictatorship and democracy
Dictatorship vs. Democracy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Similarities between dictatorship and democracy
Voting is an integral part of electing leaders in government, without it, the subjects of the government would, in all likelihood, cause public unrest. It is for the reason of preventing said unrest that an effective voting system be put in place in a given government to prioritize the needs of the people. A preferential voting system would be an effective way to elect leaders in Canada due to the facts that it creates a majority government, promotes a strong two-party system, and creates a large pool of votes. A majority government would be able to be elected from the use of a preferential ballot and would not allow for a minority government and as thus would allow for a better controlled government with little conflict when a new bill is
Firstly, to create a majority government the use of a preferential ballot would be used; a preferential ballot would not allow for a minority government to form. Using the first few rankings of the preferential ballot, the voting system should be able to arrive at a party with the majority of preference in the votes. Should this not happen and a minority government has the possibility of being formed due to greatest amount of votes, the party with the least preference shown towards it would be taken off the ballet, disqualified from the election. Said process would continue until the point where a majority government would form. This leads into a second point, with a majority government there cannot be a minority government, it is one or the other. It prevents a corrupt party so that, even with receiving the most votes towards it, it cannot become the governing power in a given government. Minority government cannot be formed because the basis of a preferential voting system is in full opposition against it, ruling that a vote resulting in a minority government would be redone. Lastly, a preferential voting system would allow for people to, instead of just electing leaders, elect ideologies. With a preferential system, constituents can rank the ideologies of various parties in order of their agreement to them, allowing them
The use of a preferential ballot would allow voters to order parties based on preference and thus create an accurate vote. With all votes being preferential, the voting pool would be completely accurate in how the majority feels about the ideologies of specific parties. This is important because the government must represent the needs of the people and the more accurate the votes, the better representation of the wishes of the populace. Secondly, the use of a preferential voting system allows for votes for minority parties to not be wasted. Constituents who would vote for minority parties often opt out of doing so based on the sole reason that the opposition is heavily against them. Those that do vote, however, have their vote wasted as the minority party has no chance of actually playing a big role in the government. If a preferential voting system were to be used, votes would have to be given for other parties and as such would add more votes to the pool in favour for the larger parties that are to be voted for. Lastly, the use of a preferential voting system involves little voter apathy as with said system, every vote counts; every vote counts because it one is able to vote against parties they oppose and for parties they agree with. No longer would one do nothing when voting comes, one would be able to add a
All in all, compulsory voting can seriously help out the United States of America. Although, forcing people to vote will make a lot more ignorant people vote for no reason, it will help get rid of those people by making them more intelligent in the world of politics, it will help rid fraudulent votes, and will help people realize that there are many more required things that are less important than voting. Compulsory voting will
The electoral system in Canada has been utilized for over a century, and although it has various strengths which have helped preserve the current system, it also has glaringly obvious weaknesses. In recent years, citizens and experts alike have questioned whether Canada’s current electoral system, known as First Past the Post (FPTP) or plurality, is the most effective system. Although FPTP is a relatively simple and easy to understand electoral system, it has been criticized for not representing the popular vote and favouring regions which are supportive of a particular party. FPTP does have many strengths such as simplicity and easy formation of majority governments, however, its biggest drawback is that it does not proportionally represent
One may be surprised to learn that the turnout rate of individuals voting in Canada's federal elections has never reached 80% (Elections Canada). In fact, it has been decreasing since the middle of the twentieth century, as shown by an increase in voter apathy. An electoral system is designed to provide those who live in democratic governments with the opportunity to vote – in an election – for the candidate whose platform coincides with their political beliefs. This can be achieved through a direct democracy, where citizens are directly involved in the decision-making process, or through an indirect democracy, where citizens elect a delegate to act on their behalf. In a direct democracy, all citizens would be present during governmental meetings and have the opportunity to give verbal input. As one may expect, this would be extremely difficult to coordinate with Canada's population of 34.88 billion (Statistics Canada). Canada uses an indirect democracy, which allows for two basic forms of electoral systems in which representatives are elected. In the simple plurality electoral system, the candidate who receives the greatest number of votes is elected, regardless of a majority or not. It is commonly known as the “first-past-the-post” system, which alludes to a horse race; the winner passes the post with the highest number of votes, and only need to garner more votes than their opponents. The successful candidate wins all the seats in their riding or constituency while the candidates who places second or third will receive no seats, regardless of how many votes they lose by. Proportional representation is the second form of electoral system used in Canada; the percentage of the votes received by a party is proportionate to the numb...
...eft our own system to fester and decay. Unfortunately for Canadians, the only way that we can actually change our electoral system is if the party in power lets us. The problem with that is the ruling party generally has been granted a phony majority from the antiquated SMP system, and so changing the electoral system is the last thing that they want to do, unless they one day find themselves on the outside looking in. In 1984 when he was campaigning for the Liberal leadership, Chretien told reporters in Brandon that if elected he would introduce proportional representation “right after the next election”6. In 1993, two elections later, Chretien would win a majority with only 41% of the popular vote, and interestingly enough noble plans for reform were soon scuttled. In 1997 the Liberals won only 39% of the vote, and in 2000 only 42%, and then in 2003 Chretien retired after ten years as our unjustly elected dictator without ever raising the issue of electoral reform. With the current minority government, we have an unprecedented chance to create real change, and we can only hope that the voice of the majority gets through and our government does what the people actually want.
To enforce voting to be mandatory , this will prompt more Americans to pay attention to the choices for their representatives. Mandating would stimulate the demand side, motivating voters to understand and acknowledge who they are voting for. Therefore , voting is to be a responsibility than a option.
It has become widely accepted that Canada uses a first past the post electoral system. However, this system may not be in the best interest of Canada any more. There are many reasons why Canada should change its electoral system to a mixed member proportional one, a variant of proportional representation. With a first past the post system, the elected officials will always be of the majority and this excludes minorities from fair representation. Adopting MMP can create stronger voter turnouts, more personal campaigning, better individual representation, and better party selection. John Hiemstra and Harold Janson, are both in favour of a MMP electoral system. They understand that with the switch, the citizens will get more representation in parliament, their preferred choice will have some say in the House of Commons, and finally someone can be held accountable which creates a closer knit between citizens and Members of Parliament. Nelson Wiseman argues against the MMP system because he feels that there is nothing to be fixed in Canada. If the current system has been working well thus far, there is no need to change it. MMP would allow smaller parties to have their voices heard. Unfortunately first past the post tends to have an over representation of regional parties; contrary to first past the post system, MMP lets Canadians have advocates and legislators who the majority of citizens agree with. Another advantage of MMP is the elimination of strategic voting. With MMP people can finally vote for who they want to rather than choose who the majority may prefer. A change in the electoral system of Canada will create a more fair and just Parliament governing the citizens.
Democracy is defined as government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system (Democracy, n.d.). Canadians generally pride themselves in being able to call this democratic nation home, however is our electoral system reflective of this belief? Canada is a constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary democracy that has been adopted from the British system. Few amendments have been made since its creation, which has left our modern nation with an archaic system that fails to represent the opinions of citizens. Canada’s current “first-past-the-post” (FPTP) system continues to elect “false majorities” which are not representative of the actual percentage of votes cast. Upon closer examination of the current system, it appears that there are a number of discrepancies between our electoral system and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Other nations provide Canada with excellent examples of electoral systems that more accurately represent the opinions of voters, such as proportional representation. This is a system of voting that allocates seats to a political party based on the percentage of votes cast for that party nationwide. Canada’s current system of voting is undemocratic because it fails to accurately translate the percentage of votes cast to the number of seats won by each party, therefore we should adopt a mixed member proportional representation system to ensure our elections remain democratic.
...lity of the votes (Shugart 632). Each states would be important under such a system, as candidates would be forced to address as many voters as possible, not just "voting blocs" that could swing a plurality in the state and, therefore, the entire state. More people would participate in elections because they would know that every vote did indeed count.
Americans are often told that every vote counts but unfortunately in today's system this is false, and a great deal of our votes count for nothing at all. By implementing proportional representation, however, America as a nation will be moving towards actually making every vote count and every perspective heard. Proportional representation, if used in conjunction with programs to increase voter awareness and voting ease, will ensure a more politically involved youth and a more democratic democracy.
...d I believe that proportional representation would be the most effective system to further the goals of democracy. If we use the single member plurality system we automatically ignore and exclude the voice of the people who didn’t win the election in a first past the post method. On the other hand in the proportional system rather than all seats being given to the party with the most votes every party gets the seats equal to the amount of votes they were able to obtain. This would allow all the people who voted to have their ‘”voice” represented in the government even though the party they voted for did not end up winning the election. This would encourage and engage many citizens to become involved in the political process; who otherwise would be discourage to vote at the fact that even if they vote, if their party loses their vote would be useless.
Today in America, less than half of young voters between the ages of 18 and 24 vote (TheBestColleges.org). What most of these new adults fail to realize, is that their government depends on them to vote and elect new leaders to represent their country. Many of them make excuses to avoid voting, when really, they benefit most from voting.
Although the rules and regulations for voting in the United States have been changed over the course of history, there are some major updates needed to the voting system as a whole. The system used today may have worked well in the past, but with the hardcore and fast-paced politics used today, and the advancements in technology over the past few centuries, the system has holes throughout it, and has failed time and time again, with a good possibility of failing once again in future elections.
Why is it that people are so against the idea of change? Change isn’t scary or frightful. For those people who are scared of change, are the ones who make unfair laws and rules that people who are different have to follow. Like African-Americans, who had far few rights then they do today.
Plurality is also known as “first past the post,” plurality is by far the most common voting system for single-winner races. Unfortunately your “vote” is the name of a single candidate, and the most named candidate wins.
The United States of America was built on the fundamental principles of democracy. Democracy is government by the people for the people. The people have opinions about government that are expressed mainly through voting. It is common knowledge that anyone of age can choose to vote. **** There are many issues in the election system of the United States. Some issues include, the absence of a defined right to vote in the Constitution, the American ballots, the Electoral College, the cost of being a politician, and the electronic voting systems in use today. In this paper I will address problems in the electoral system and my opinion on various solutions.