Abstract
Voters opposed to Electoral Reform will have a 4 to 1 advantage
over voters who support Electoral Reform. This expands on the
information I provided in my earlier submission,
WHEATLEY-0581
where I said the advantage was 3 to 1.
Submission Content
In Submission
WHEATLEY-0581 I
compared the minimum popular support needed for adoption of
Electoral Reform, 60%, to the minimum popular opposition needed to
reject Electoral Reform, 20.25%, and concluded that the voting
advantage for those opposed is 60/20.25 or 2.96 to 1. I had not
considered the advantage in each special case where 60% support
needed represents an advantage for those opposed of 1.5 to 1 and
20.25% opposition needed represents an advantage for those opposed
of 3.94 to 1.
Those supporting Electoral Reform must work to meet two goals, 50%
support in 48 districts AND 60% support province wide.
Because they must meet both goals they must spread their efforts to
meet both.
Those opposed to Electoral Reform need only meet one of two goals,
50% opposition in 32 districts OR 40% opposition province wide.
Because they need meet only one goal or the other they can focus
their resources on the goal which is easiest to meet, 50%
opposition in 32 districts, where they have an advantage of 3.94 to
1.
Those opposed to Electoral Reform can force the contest to take
place where they have the greatest advantage and therefore that
greatest advantage should be used to describe the true nature of
the contest. Those opposed can select the 32 districts where they
are most likely to secure 50% opposition and the rest of the
province can be ignored. The vote province wide could be 394
thousand in favor of Electoral Reform versus 100 thousand opposed
and the recommendation of the Citizens' Assembly could be
rejected.
Because the conditions for adoption of Electoral Reform are so
unfair, we have a situation where the best electoral system for BC
is the reform that is most likely to be adopted on election day,
regardless of the technical merits or shortcomings of the reform
you recommend.
Thank you for considering this.
levelCMS