Thursday, October 11, 2007

Huh.

What Greg said. Seriously, what's the fucking point any more?

On a lighter note, philosophy and policy blogging will continue starting this weekend (the former) and continuing into next week (the latter). Whee.

2 comments:

undergroundman said...

It seems like an exaggeration to say that it failed miserably, as all these people are saying.

I'm still a little unclear on the details of MMP. Say I vote for a candidate from the Green party, but my second vote goes to the Libertarian party. What are the consequences of this? Are only the candidates who are explicitly voted in put into power? As I've said before, I'm wary of power in the hands of bureaucratic parties.

ADHR said...

It did, though. That's the thing. 37% (or so) voted in favour, and the powers-that-be are using this as an excuse to quash electoral reform efforts in Ontario. So, the only way it's ever going to happen is if other provinces start doing it, or if the feds go ahead and do it first. The latter's a huge long-shot, and the former will take a lot of time.

The idea is that anyone who wins a plurality in their riding (district) will win that seat. The number of seats thus held by parties is compared to their votes on the second half of the ballot. If the party should have more seats, considering the second half of the ballot, then it has actually won, from the first half, then they get enough seats to bring them up to the former number. These make-up seats are filled by candidates drawn from a list that the parties provide before the vote.

It doesn't necessarily put power into the hands of bureaucratic parties, although I do share the worry. The four biggest parties (Liberals, PC, NDP and Green) all publicly said that they would conduct internal elections to determine who would be on their lists. And, really, the parties have tremendous power in Ontario elections anyway. Certainly, though, a transferrable vote system would be able to ensure more proportionality of representation while simultaneously leaving open the possibility that an independent candidate could get elected, or that a party's "star" candidates are overlooked in favour of other members.

MMP was never supposed to be perfect. It was just better than what we have.