Other ways to pick the winners
One of my rules for living is that I don’t bet. Not on pony races, or sporting events or eventual award winners. After all, even though I try to lose graciously, I’m not a fool. And, based on my record, I shouldn’t vote, either. This last round of marking the bulletin demonstrates that an educated, well-considered choice of best candidate doesn’t translate into picking a winner. We really do need a better system of elections, just to give people like me a say in the result.
Today marked my second day in a row of attending public information meetings; a new personal record. This afternoon saw me seated upstairs from the local rink, in the company of a mixed batch of technicians, clerks and politicians from the local legislature. More of them than of us, actually. This is potato harvest time, and a dry afternoon doesn’t get wasted. The point of the meeting was that we need a new electoral system in the province, and this was an opportunity to consider some of the alternative models.
No matter how you mark the ballot, someone has to lose. The game changer would be to have a system where the losers aren’t swept off the table immediately. In a best scenario, the proportion of votes would go to choosing the eventual winning slate. No more party-biased imbalance.
In practical terms, we’re years away from any change, but at least someone believes that there are better ways of electing the representatives. Putting aside the flaw of allowing those representatives to frame the method, I quite enjoyed my afternoon.
In passing, I finally had a chance to meet one of the local genealogists that serve as an inspiration.
