On October 10th in Ontario, we will vote for or against the referendum. Do you think that Ontario should keep the First Past the Post system (the one being currently used) or should we switch to a Mixed Member Proportional system (the "new" system)? Anyone have any thoughts?
2007-10-06 13:51:14 · 5 answers · asked by marty_is_a_girl 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Not living in Ontario, I don't have a vote.
The mixed member proportional system is a variation of the system used in Germany, Scotland, and Wales. Basically, it elects a number of members from ridings (or constituencies or districts or whatever name a particular country uses for its electoral divisions) and a number of members from a region. In the case of Ontario, the region would be the entire province. Within the region, each party has a "list" of candidates running for the regional slots. In each riding, a voter casts two votes -- one for the member to represent the riding and one for a party list. After the votes from all ridings in a region are in, the party lists are used to "top up" the representation from each party so that the total representation in parliament equals the proportion of the vote received by each party. In other words, a party that "outperformed" its proportionate vote in the number of ridings won would get fewer party list seats and the party that underperformed would get more party list seats.
The advantage of a mixed member proportional system is that it keeps a local member to represent a particular area while making the balance of parliament reflect the actual strength of the major parties. The disadvantage is that if there are more than two major parties (which would be the case in Ontario), this system increases the likelihood of either a minority or a coalition government.
My personal opinion is that as long as there are only three major parties and the system does not encourage additional parties (which is a possibility) MMP is a good system, as long as you understand that it will often lead to a Liberal-NDP coalition government. The problem is in countries with several minor parties (of which Germany is a good example). In these countries, the small parties play a key role in determining who governs making it hard for the voters to force a change in policy.
2007-10-06 14:18:31 · answer #1 · answered by Tmess2 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First Past The Post is an unfair system. It has one advantage in that it produces strong majorities, but it does so by effectively silencing the voice of many of the voters. Not in Ontario so I have no say, but my own preference in a voting system would be for STV (Single Transferable Vote).
You want advice... give democracy a chance..trust the people and make sure all voices are heard!
2007-10-07 00:23:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
What is this "Mixed Member Proportional" system?
Edit:
Hmm...why not just dump the party system and have just independents? The party system is what seems to be causing the problems in most governments.
2007-10-06 14:05:00 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If a few people don't vote in NY, CA, TX and many other states, it won't matter anyway, because of the Electoral College! Obama is ahead in NY with 57% of the vote, McCain with only 39%. McCain leads in TX with 51%, to Obama's 38%. If you don't like how the Electoral College ignores so many people's votes, and would like a true representational system, write your elected officials.
2016-04-07 08:14:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Keep the FPTP system.
2007-10-06 16:47:22 · answer #5 · answered by I can't think of a good name 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋