More for Apr. 16-19th

STV system reflects voters' real wishes
Victoria Times Colonist
Sun 19 Apr 2009
Byline: Judy Gaylord
http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/letters/system+reflects+voters+real+wishes/1511940/story.html

Why Kids in Canada Want Election Reform
Seattle Weekly
April 19, 2009
by Krist Novoselic
http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2009/04/poll_74_per_cent_of_british_co.php

STV provides for fair results
Kamloops Daily News
Sat 18 Apr 2009
Page: A6
Section: Opinion
Byline: Dick McMaster

Once again you will all have the opportunity to change the way we vote. No longer will you have to hold your nose and vote for a candidate who may just be the best of a bad lot.

Once again, we have the opportunity to endorse the recommendations of the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform on May 12. This was a group of 80 men and 80 women with no political affiliations.

After 11 months of deliberations, the assembly identified three values that would resonate positively with most British Columbians, including greater voter choice; fairer results and accountable local MLAs.

In the 2005 election, 58 per cent of those who voted supported STV. However, the initiative required affirmation from 60 per cent of the voters. On May 12, we have one last opportunity to choose STV for BC.

What are the benefits of STV?

1. Greater voter choice.

2. Fairer results (in 2001 the NDP received almost 40 per cent of the vote but actually elected only two members in the legislature).

3. Depending upon the size and population of a riding, there may be as few as two or three MLAs or as many as seven or eight.

It will be absolutely essential for inter-party collaboration within the riding for the benefit of the regional population. Good government will trump party affiliation and all riding MLAs will be expected to work for their constituents.

DICK McMASTER

Kamloops

What price do we put on having a better voting system
Richmond Review
Fri 17 Apr 2009
Page: 11
Section: Opinion
http://www.bclocalnews.com/richmond_southdelta/richmondreview/opinion/letters/43203317.html

Votes will count with BC-STV
Nanaimo News Bulletin
Fri 17 Apr 2009
Page: 0011
Section: Opinion
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_central/nanaimonewsbulletin/opinion/letters/43195277.html

Votes will count with BC-STV
Nanaimo Bulletin
April 17, 2009
by Jordan Ellis
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_central/nanaimonewsbulletin/opinion/letters/43195277.html

Single Transferable Vote referendum a worthy cause
New Westminster News Leader
Fri 17 Apr 2009
Page: 7
Section: Opinion
http://www.bclocalnews.com/greater_vancouver/newwestminsternewsleader/opinion/letters/Single_Transferable_Vote_referendum_a_worthy_cause.html

Another view on STV...
Prince Rupert Daily News
Fri 17 Apr 2009
Page: 4
Section: Opinion & Letters
Byline: Shoni Field

To the Editor,

Letter writer Roth's belief that the Citizens' Assembly was manipulated by the Fraser Institute or anybody else is wrong. We were 160 ordinary citizens with no vested interests, chosen randomly from the voters list, a man and a women from every constituency in the province. We spent 11 months studying electoral systems and listening British Columbians. Voters told us that they wanted a fair and proportional system, with more responsive local representation and greater voter choice. 95% of us voted to recommend BC-STV, because it was the system that best met BC's wishes. It is proportional; with 90 plus years of results from around the world, this fact is inarguable. But there are many proportional systems, Single Transferable Vote rose above them all because: Only STV provides voters with greater choice at the local level. Only STV makes local contests more competitive, and MLAs more accountable to their constituents. Only STV gives MLAs some leverage to champion important local issues with government. The Citizens' Assembly chose BC-STV in large part because it puts the voters in charge at the local level.

- Shoni Field

Former Citizens' Assembly member

Voting for reform
Vernon Morning Star
Thu 16 Apr 2009
Section: Opinion
Byline: Cara Brady
http://www.bclocalnews.com/okanagan_similkameen/vernonmorningstar/opinion/43138827.html

Time is now to change voting system
Prince George Free Press
Thu 16 Apr 2009
http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_north/pgfreepress/sports/43130607.html

STV vote urged
Vernon Morning Star
Thu 16 Apr 2009
http://www.bclocalnews.com/okanagan_similkameen/vernonmorningstar/news/43137957.html

A case for BC-STV
Prince George Free Press
Thu 16 Apr 2009
Page: 00A8
Section: Opinion
http://www.bclocalnews.com/bc_north/pgfreepress/opinion/43131252.html

If it's good enough for assembly...
Comox Valley Record
Thu 16 Apr 2009
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_north/comoxvalleyrecord/opinion/letters/43140797.html

BC-STV voting system: how it works
Campbell River Mirror
Thu 16 Apr 2009
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_north/campbellrivermirror/opinion/43122827.html

STV: a reason to show up at the polls
Dawson Creek Daily News
Thu 16 Apr 2009
Page: A7
Section: Editorial & Opinion
Byline: Greg Amos

Tuesday evening was one of the finest nights of the year so far, and it's quite possible that those who'd planned on attending the B.C. single transferable vote (BC-STV) forum at the Dawson Creek library blew off the plans in favour of some fresh air instead.

But it was still disheartening to see just one member of the public show up to an information meeting with big implications for democracy in B.C.

The proposed BC-STV voting system is a major improvement, plain and simple. It entirely eliminates the need to vote strategically. Voters can simply vote for who they want to represent them and stand a chance of seeing that person elected.

Federal Green Party leader Elizabeth May isn't out of line in calling this new voting system a "quantum leap," and it's no surprise that B.C.'s Green Party has picked up the mantle of STV as a major part of its election campaign.

The May 12 election will feature a head-to-head clash between the BC Liberal Party and the NDP. It's very unlikely that MLAs from any other party will get elected. What this means in essence is that B.C. has taken on a de facto two-party system. And it's been that way for years, whether the top parties bear the Social Credit, Conservative, NDP, or Liberal moniker.

This is a bad thing for democracy - when MLAs frequently win ridings with less than 50 per cent of the popular vote, it means a lot of voters aren't being represented in Victoria.

Under the first-past-the-post voting system, this two-party system is fairly well entrenched. Campaign spending gets results, and without being able to outspend the competition, candidates from minor parties have a slim chance of being elected.

Right now, there are only two parties with any real money in B.C. As reported on David Schreck's Strategic Thoughts blog, the 2005 election saw the two top parties spend most of the dough. BC Liberals spent a total of $7.76 million and the NDP spent $5.88 million, while the Green Party spent just $281,000. Yet the Green Party has consistently ranked as B.C.'s third most popular party, finishing with 9.2 per cent of the overall popular vote that year, and 12.4 per cent of the vote in the 2001 election.

So something's broken with the election system. Common sense dictates it should be fixed.

Gordon Campbell first called for electoral reform as leader of the opposition. To his credit, he initiated a process to seek out reform when he became premier in 2001. The BC-STV proposal, recommended by the Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform, was made a referendum question during the 2005 election, and received 58 per cent support, just a little short of the 60 per cent popular support BC-STV needs to become established. For that reason, the question is being posed to B.C. voters one more time.

"A majority government based on majority support - that doesn't bother me," said Sandra Hoffman, a speaker for the Yes to STV campaign at the Tuesday night meeting. "But a majority government with 39 per cent of the popular vote - there's something wrong with that."

That scenario took place in 1996, when the NDP won power with that meager percentage of voter approval. 2001 also featured a weird result, when the BC Liberals won 97 per cent of the seats with just 57 per cent of the popular vote.

These strange scenarios are not possible under STV. The workings of it are slightly complicated, but it can be explained like this: current ridings are combined to form larger districts with multiple members. The total number of MLAs we elect in B.C. does not change.

On election day, voters can rank candidates in order of preference, numbering from 1, 2, 3, and so on. The voter can rank as many or as few candidates as they want to.

When it comes time to count the votes, a candidate wins a seat if he or she receives a certain number of votes, determined by a formula that depends on how many MLAs are in that multi-member riding. If a voter's first choice has already reached that magic number, that voter's ballot is transferred to his or her second choice candidate.

Under STV, the two-member district for the Peace would mean at least 68 per cent of voters can be guaranteed their votes will count for something.

BC-STV is not some system scrawled out on the back of a napkin. It's a well thought-out and effective system, but it's also undeniably more complicated than first-past-the-post. And it most likely will result in more minority governments. But minority governments can get things done, and a new voting system could usher in a paradigm shift that would turn B.C.'s legislature into something more productive than the partisan flame war it often turns into.

I've been writing about provincial politics for two years, and I still have a lot to learn. But I can guarantee the referendum is worth voting in favour of. By transferring power from political parties to voters, STV should result in a lot less voter apathy and a lot more real work getting done in the legislature.