Monday, May 11, 2009

Why I Think BC-STV Will Fail Tomorrow

Because if you can't explain it to the average Joe in less than a half hour, you're bound to fail. Then again, it is BC, so the unexplainable sometimes happens.



Photobucket

5 comments:

Chrystal Ocean said...

BC-STV can be explained in under five minutes. Others have explained in less than two minutes.

James Curran said...

Just sayin'. I have no stake either way. MMP failed miserably here, but the STV side is far more organized in BC than the MMP ONTARIO side was.

roblaw said...

The whole STV (is it pure coincidence that the acronym is so perilously close to "STD") movement so clearly re-affirms my decision some 24 years ago to leave lotus land for Alberta...

Have fun today BC'ers.. part of me hopes you do vote in the STV.. right now, Alberta could use a boost in business investment dollars...

The Mound of Sound said...

Forget it Roblaw. Every time you people get your hands on any money you just piss it all away.

roblaw said...

..without seeming to just "rant".. my particular concern (other than the self-interest of not advocating a process that, presently, is very "left of centre" friendly - is that if I understand, we will either:

a) increase government to create multiple representatives in jurisdicitons currently having one; or, more likely;

b) consolidate constituencies, so that we vote as a "region" as opposed to our current one member per constituency.

Problem. How does that prevent tyranny of the majority in urban centres.. maybe there is not a huge difference between Coquitlam and Burnaby and New West.. but how about Salmon Arm and Kamloops? (see here: http://community.netidea.com/ccbc/map.html)

Is this potentially allowing for 4 MLA's from Kamloops and none from rural areas.. as if each voter in Kamloops, more or less, gets 3 votes (using preferential ballots).. that increases the power of concentrated voting centres (cities) at the expense of rural areas, no?