What causes voter apathy? Why, in the most recent federal and provincial elections, did roughly 40% of eligible voters stay home? Perhaps candidate A, running for party A led by leader A, is not perceived as being significantly different from, or better than, candidate B, running for party B led by leader B.
This lack of perceived difference between candidate-party-leader A and candidate-party-leader B, is not the only problem in an election. It is also impossible to vote directly on an issue. Yes, you can let an issue influence how you vote, but on election day you are forced to endorse one candidate, party and leader and repudiate all other candidates, parties and leaders. Issues take a back seat to personalities.
In theory, voters can have their specific concerns addressed during an election. But that's not reality. Elections simply do not provide voters with a direct say on any issue. Rather, elections are centered on personalities. The real question, the only real choice, is as to which party should run the province or the country.
A vote for an Opposition Party candidate is a vote to replace the Government Party, and a vote for the Government Party candidate is a rejection of the Opposition Parties' bid for power. But Canadians cannot use their ballots to implement - or to reject - any specific policy concerning health, education, labour, social services, the criminal justice system, fiscal issues, the environment, energy, infrastructure, agriculture, etc.
Total control remains with the politicians up to five years at a time. And when voting day finally arrives, issues are drowned out by one big question: which leader/party should be the Government/Premier, or the Government/Prime Minister? Even when issues are ...
... middle of paper ...
...vote for MLAs and MPs, they are also smart enough to vote in a referendum on an issue of their choice.
By increasing the individual voter's effectiveness, citizens' initiative decreases voter cynicism. Citizens' initiative enables the active participation of all voters in their democracy. It reduces the influence of those who lobby politicians behind closed doors. Citizens' initiative gives taxpayers the power to ensure that difficult and controversial issues cannot be avoided or ignored.
Citizens' initiative makes politicians more accountable and more responsive to taxpayer concerns at all times. The fact that citizens could put a proposal on the ballot puts pressure on politicians to act on the concerns of Canadians. In short, citizen-initiated referendums will increase accountability and openness, empower taxpayers, and improve our representative democracy.
Canada is a society built on the promise of democracy; democracy being 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.” In order to operate at full potential, the people of Canada must voice their opinions and participate fully in the political system. This is why it’s shocking to see that people are becoming less engaged in politics and the voter turnout has steadily been declining over the last 20 years. This lack of participation by Canadians is creating a government that is influenced by fewer people, which is detrimental to the democratic system Canada is built on.
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...
The United States national elections have been experiencing a steady decline of eligible voters showing up to vote. This steady decline has been ongoing since experiencing a significant increase in voter turnout from 1948 through 1960. Over the years there has been significant, meticulous research done to try to pinpoint the cause of the decline in voter turnout over years. All of this research has led to the production of an enormous number of literatures written on the perceived causes. The vast amount of literature produced has led to a number of competing explanations about this decline. The quest for the answer to the question of, why this decline in voter turnout, is very important for an overwhelming majority of Americans and our democratic system because the people/voters can only truly be represented by our government if all eligible voters go out and vote. For this paper I will examine four theories that attempt to explain the decline. The four theories that I will discuss are voting barriers, campaign contributions, negative campaign advertising, and finally the cultural explanation. However, through thorough exploration and critiques of the strengths and weaknesses of these four theories, we will find that the cultural explanation theory is currently the most persuasive theory in the group. Finally, I will also explore some reasons as to why citizens do vote as well.
The right to vote for non-citizens has become an increasingly controversial topic due to the strong and often divisive opinions of permanent Canadian residents. The capacity to vote is one of the most important and valued freedoms granted to individuals. Although the acceptance of non-citizen resident voting is frequently encouraged in order to propel self-governing justice and immigrant inclusion, opponents claim that it is in a nation’s best interest to delay voting rights to non-citizens. According to this claim, by preserving voting rights to citizens, non-citizens would have the social responsibility to actively learn the essential community services and self-ruled obligations necessary to earn their citizenship. In spite of this claim, non-citizens should be allowed to vote because the right to vote offers immigrants a more welcomed chance to contribute in the decision-making processes that take place in Canadian legislature. Seeing that this legislature administrates the rights and freedoms of the immigrant populations, it would only be just if immigrants had the right to elect candidates who spoke on behalf of their best interests.
...e type of what has seared his inmost heart! Stand any here that question God's judgment on a sinner! Behold! Behold, a dreadful witness of it!? (232-233)
If the parties in our governmental system would openly discuss about the difference in positions and in point of views within the groups in realizing these controversies will minimize the unnecessary troubles greatly. Another possibility of improvement would be following the great examples of other countries with the Westminster governance system. For example, in countries like Australia and New Zealand have already a well-established party discipline rules that are less strict than the ones in Canada and way more effective than the ones we have. In an article, it was said that” Australian parties are considerably more discipline than those in the UK an even those in Canada, although the degree of discipline in the latter has been the subject of much critical comment. Parliamentary votes in the UK are subject to varying degrees of party discipline, with the most rigid being the so-called” three-line whip’ votes. Neither Australia nor Canada has such gradations. In New Zealand party discipline has increased under its mixed Member proportional (MMP) electoral system and, unless party leaders have agreed to a conscience vote, standing orders require a party vote to be taken rather than individuals casting their votes in the chamber. “(Sawer, Abjorensen and Larkin
Atticus is always guiding Jem and Scout with advice so that they will become more compassionate people. Atticus sets a good example for the children when Mr Ewell confronts him. Even though he is provoked and insulted, Atticus simply has a “peaceful reaction”. This shows the children never to get into fights with people when they are upset about something. Atticus shows children about courage and all the forms it appears in. When Jem is told to read for Ms Dubose and she dies, Atticus explains to Jem about her morphine addiction, and how she died “free”. This shows Jem that courage isn’t always where you expect to find it, and that if you have some compassion, you see people for who they really are. The most important piece of advice he gives his children is that “you never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view… until you climb into his skin and walk around in it.” This is important for the children to know, because it helps them to be more caring people, and they use this advice throughout the novel.
The issue of electoral reform has become more important than ever in Canada in recent years as the general public has come to realize that our current first-past-the-post, winner-take-all system, formally known as single-member plurality (SMP) has produced majority governments of questionable legitimacy. Of the major democracies in the world, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom are the only countries that still have SMP systems in place. Interestingly enough, there has been enormous political tension and division in the last few years in these countries, culminating with the election results in Canada and the USA this year that polarized both countries. In the last year we have seen unprecedented progress towards electoral reform, with PEI establishing an electoral reform commissioner and New Brunswick appointing a nine-member Commission on Legislative Democracy in December 2003 to the groundbreaking decision by the British Columbia Citizen’s Assembly on October 24, 2004 that the province will have a referendum on May 17, 2005 to decide whether or not they will switch to a system of proportional representation. This kind of reform is only expected to continue, as Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty decided to take BC’s lead and form an independent Citizen’s Assembly with the power to determine whether or not Ontario will have a referendum regarding a change to a more proportional system. There is still much work to do however, and we will examine the inherent problems with Canada’s first-past-the-post system and why we should move into the 21st century and switch to a form of proportional representation.
Milner, Henry. First Past the Post? Progress Report on Electoral Reform Initiatives in Canadian Provinces. Ottawa: Institute for Research and Public Policy, 5(9), 2004.
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.
In America, political candidates go against one another in a process known as an election in which citizens vote for the next person who "best" fits the position. In addition, there are various amounts of debates on whether a citizen should be compelled to vote. Although some argue if citizens should be required by law to vote, there are exceeding an amount of disadvantages.
... who are eligible of voting should get out there and vote. We fought to expand suffrage, and now we must show the government we are capable of voting.
The author of The Scarlet Letter, Nathaniel Hawthorne, expressed ideas of love, passion, shame, and punishment throughout his 1800s based novel. Due to the fact that this novel was based in a Puritan time period, it brought many mental and sometimes physical difficulties for the main character, Hester Prynne. The Puritans solely believed in God and all of his rules. With that said, the author decided to illustrate the drama of Hester Prynne and Arthur Dimmesdale’s adultery in order to describe the change in Hester’s attitude. Because of the many events, adversities and struggles, Hester had a complete change in attitude from shame and embarrassment to love, proudness and satisfaction.
This paper will begin by highlighting aspects of citizen participation showing the advantages and disadvantages it has on the policy process and discuss how citizen participation in the policy making pro...