I want to express my opinion that BC should adopt a mixed member
proportional representation voting system. I urge you
consider putting this type of system on a referendum
ballot. I have outlined three main reasons for
supporting a mixed member proportional representation system,
below.
1. Many Issues are Constituency-Independent
Increasingly, important issues that face us have impact across
constituencies. Our current system focuses on ensuring
all constituencies have representation, by electing one person from
each constituency. Certainly, it is
important that all areas have representation, yet it is also
important that minority views across constituencies are
represented. If an issue elicits a certain
view from many people across constituency
boundaries, it is imperative that this group is
represented. In our current system, it is possible that
this group does not have any representation in
legislature. As long as this group fails to have the
most support in every constituency, this group receives no
representation in legislature at all.
A few issues that may primarily be constituency-independent
include: non-localised environmental issues (e.g. air pollution),
inter-provincial and international policies and trade, and minority
rights and privileges. (Obviously, specific issues may
fall under federal jurisdiction. Equally as clear, this
doesn't minimise the argument for mixed member proportional
representation on principle.)
2. Strategic Voting Mars Political Voice
Many citizens vote strategically, in that they vote for a
candidate they do not primarily support because they think that
candidate has the best chance of defeating a second candidate they
do not want in office. This can result in more votes
for a candidate than the number of people who primarily support
that candidate, and for fewer votes for another candidate than the
number of people who primarily support that candidate.
This is neither a just nor an effective way to address the issues
citizens are concerned about in parliament; it is, at best, an
efficient way to avoid presenting in parliament the views citizens
least want represented, possibly allowing those that are second
least wanted. Moreover, strategic voting leads to
negative campaigning by political parties. This, I
believe, frustrates and alienates many citizens from the political
process.
3. Mixed Member Proportional Representation is Truer
Representation
With mixed member proportional representation the vast majority
of votes actively contribute to the election of a
person. (i.e. There are much fewer "wasted
votes.") This is intrinsically important: the vast
majority of votes "count." Yet more important is the
effect that people feel less marginalised and in greater control of
their political lives. This contributes to a desire to
participate more in political discussions and forums because
citizens feel more strongly that they can have an
effect. This can be tremendous for the
health of society.
For these main reasons, I urge you to consider putting mixed
member proportional representation as the alternative to our
current system on a referendum ballot. In particular, I
suggest that a mixed member proportional representation system with
2/3 list seats would best serve society. Retaining
constituency seats is important, so that constituencies have
representation for those issues that have strong implications
for
particular constituencies. However, to mitigate the
effects of strategic voting on constituency seats, I believe it is
important that more than half of all seats are not constituency
seats. I suggest about 2/3 should be list seats.
Thank-you sincerely for taking my input into consideration.
levelCMS