[fvc-wat-disc] MMP on the radio

Mon Sep 17 14:25:39 EDT 2007

Hi Again,
Yes like Paul said it did improve turnout, but not a lot, sorry about that, maybe
I should have put in the not a lot part.
Marcia Soeda

On Sun Sep 16 20:40 , Paul Nijjar <paul_nijjar at yahoo.ca> sent:

>
>--- Alida and George burrettga at golden.net> wrote:
>
>> I thought Marcia's input had resolved this: yes, they found that
>> MMP DID improve turnout.
>
>A switch to a MMP system *can* improve turnout -- but the
>improvements are small, and do  not reverse the downward trend in
>voter turnout that major democracies have been facing for a long time
>now. 
>
>What is true is that European countries that use PR tend to have
>higher turnout rates than other countries (such as Canada and the US)
>that are much lower. But turnout rates are declining everywhere, and
>there is no good reason to believe that changing the voting system to
>a proportional one is the cure. 
>
>This blog post does a reasonable job of showing the trends in New
>Zealand and Germany: 
>
>http://eaves.ca/2007/09/13/exploding-the-myth-mmp-and-inceasing-voter-turnout/
>
>He is a little misleading for New Zealand because in 2005 the voter
>turnout did rise a little to 81%, as shown in 
>
>http://2005.electionresults.govt.nz/e9/html/e9_part9_1.html
>
>but that is still lower than what NZ was experiencing under FPTP.
>There is a little bit of a story there (New Zealand had two wrong-way
>majorities in 1978 and 1981, so in 1981 and 1984 the turnouts were
>pretty high) but the overall trend is pretty clear: there was a small
>jump in voter turnout since MMP, and then rates crept down again.  In
>fact, voter turnout rates in NZ fell to their lowest levels ever
>under MMP. 
>
>Wales and Scotland adopted MMP along with their process of
>"devolution". The voter turnout for Wales in particular has been
>abysmal. I don't have a nicely compiled list but you can find bits
>and pieces of information. For example, it looks like voter turnout
>in the Scottish elections has been: 
>
>1999: 58%
>2003: 49%
>2007: 52%
>
>Again, this does not bode well for the "PR cures voter turnout"
>belief. 
>
>Sources: 
>http://www.holyrood2007.net/Scotlandnew/php/webpage.php\?fid=6\?_id=31
>http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/notes/snpc-03000.pdf
>
>If you really want then I can try and track down the Wales numbers as
>well, but I hope this is enough evidence to demonstrate that I am not
>lying to you.
>  
>> Am I missing something here?
>> Did you previously name the origin of the "widespread knowledge" 
>> that  disproves Marcia Soeda's  source, research conducted by the
>> Assembly?
>
>The origin of this "widespread knowledge" is the voter turnouts that
>have been recorded for different countries. But there are many others
>-- this issue is studied widely, and nobody has a great answer as to
>why turnouts are declining or how to stop it. However, as far as I
>know there is not a single definitive work that explains this trend.
>One book that discusses these issues in some depth is "Why We Hate
>Politics", by Colin Hay, but that is not the only source. 
>
>You might also look at the Lijphardt summary that is on the Fair Vote
>Canada site: 
>
>http://www.fairvotecanada.org/files/Lijphart_summary.pdf
>
>The spin in this summary is that voter rates are higher in countries
>with PR systems than ones in non-proportional systems, but that is
>only AFTER you control for three other variables that have a much
>higher impact. That is far from a ringing endorsement. 
>
>As far as the OCA materials go, so far I know of no evidence that the
>OCA was told a different story. If you look at page 102 of 
>
>http://www.citizensassembly.gov.on.ca/assets/Democracy%20at%20Work%20-%20The%20Ontario%20Citizens%27%20Assembly%20on%20Electoral%20Reform.pdf
>
>you will read the following statement: 
>
>"The Academic Director reminded the members that the electoral system
>is only one part of the political system, and that a different
>electoral system would not necessarily change the political culture.
>Furthermore, elements such as voter turnout would likely not change
>significantly with a change in the electoral system."
>
>If there were studies shown to the OCA that indicate we could expect
>good increases in voter turnout, I for one would appreciate pointers
>to them. I want to believe that voter turnout will improve
>dramatically, and I would love to tell other people that this is the
>case. It hurt quite a bit to learn that we should not expect this. 
>
>It may also be the case that Adam was misinterpreting Hampton, and
>that the Ontario leader did not actually imply that voting rates
>would improve dramatically. But if that is what he said, then for one
>Adam was fooled when he wrote:  "For one, he suggested that moving to
>MMP would greatly improve voter turnout, which as I understand it is
>not supported by evidence from other MMP jurisdictions."
>
>My contention is the word "greatly". If Hampton is promising big
>improvements in voter turnouts then he should stop, because the
>evidence does not support that view. Many people (including myself)
>believe that proportional systems are one component to improving
>voter turnout, but the problem appears to be much bigger than simply
>switching to a proportional voting system. 
>
>- Paul
>
>--
>Paul Nijjar  http://www.fairvotecanada.org/WaterlooRegion
>Next Referendum Info Session: Sept 18, 7pm
>(Please use this Yahoo! account for future correspondence.)
>
>
>      Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo!
Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>fvc-wat-disc mailing list
>fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
>http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc
>