I believe the concept of Rolling Elections merits consideration.
To the best of my knowledge, this is a novel idea, although I have
had this in mind for federal elections for years.
Rolling Election:
Instead of one general election, schedule riding-by-riding
elections so that there is perhaps one or two going on every couple
of months. Arrange the schedule so that any given
riding will (usually) have only one election every 4 or 5
years.
Advantages:
-
An unpopular government will find itself getting voted out,
while a popular government will find itself getting voted in.
-
The People can vote more strategically because they know the
current state of government representation and can move towards the
government they want. It becomes unlikely that an undesirable
government could persist.
-
There will always be an adequate supply of representatives with
over two years' experience.
-
There will always be a majority of
representatives who are not scheduled for re-election
for over two years.
-
The promise of continuity means that bigger issues and projects
can be planned for and addressed.
-
Less disruptive by minimizing the flip-flop of the entire
government.
-
Impact of headline news and charismatic leaders on selecting the
government is reduced.
-
Easier to ensure that all polls open and close at the same
time.
-
Probably cheaper. A single crew of well-trained people can be
employed full time to manage elections.
Other Thoughts: Neither Good Nor Bad
-
Possibility of more minority governments (Not necessarily a bad
thing! It would, after all, be the People's strategic
decision!)
-
Parties may find it easier to manipulate public opinion one
riding at a time.
-
From time to time, the schedule may need to be adjusted to
account for riding changes and unexpected mid-term elections.
-
Incumbent governments and major political parties would probably
not like this scheme.
-
A party-led government that has a slim majority knows it could
lose it the next month. It has to be careful.
|
levelCMS