[fvc-wat-disc] Another opportunity for letters

[ARI DAIGEN]

Thanks Kevin! That's very eloquent--I hope it gets printed! (I'd imagine 
so.)


>From: "Kevin Smith" <kevedsmith at gmail.com>
>Reply-To: FVC Waterloo Region Discussion 
><fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org>
>To: "FVC Waterloo Region Discussion" <fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org>
>Subject: Re: [fvc-wat-disc] Another opportunity for letters
>Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 21:14:16 -0400
>
>Thanks, Ari.  Just sent the following:
>
>Thanks to John Roe for some overdue education in Friday's Record
>around the Mixed-Member Proportional system that Ontarians will vote
>on for the October 10 referendum.
>
>A couple of points:
>
>For the 39 list seats, all parties have committed to selecting these
>members democratically under the MMP system.  The member lists, and
>how they were chosen, will be known to voters before the election, so
>they can vote against a party who has a list of hacks who don't
>represent voters.  The list members will ultimately be responsible to
>voters, just like the riding representatives are.
>
>Coalition governments can be quite stable, and have worked well in
>other countries.  The "frontroom" negotiations are exactly what we
>need for a legislature which truly represents Ontarians, and needs to
>compromise on divisive issues.  This is much better than a one-party
>phony majority with absolute power ramming legislation through, which
>happens all too often under the current system.
>
>People I've talked to have mostly welcomed this change, breathing
>fresh air into our democratic system.  Please join with me in voting
>for Mixed-Member Proportional on October 10.
>
>Kevin Smith
>
>On 10/5/07, ARI DAIGEN <adaigen at sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > For anyone who hasn't already had a letter published, there's a great
> > educational op-ed piece by John Roe in today's Record that's worth
> > responding to:
> >
> > http://news.therecord.com/Opinions/article/251873
> >
> > Roe tries to be even-handed of course, and says what both proponents 
>*and*
> > opponents of MMP say. I'd suggest shooting down the opposing arguments 
>he
> > gives: 1.point out that party lists, as well as the processes for 
>choosing
> > them, would be known to the public before election day, meaning voters 
>*can*
> > vote for or against parties whose lists they don't like. 2.Point out 
>that
> > coalitions are made through *front*-room wheeling and dealing, which is 
>the
> > type of cooperation we want to see in a democracy, and is a lot more
> > democratic than false majorities that hold absolute power without having 
>to
> > consult anyone!
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Ari
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > fvc-wat-disc mailing list
> > fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
> > http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc
> >
>_______________________________________________
>fvc-wat-disc mailing list
>fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
>http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc