[fvc-wat-disc] I want PR

Thu Sep 1 14:21:52 EDT 2016

We are very specifically not selling our new system, Laurel.  It does
happen to be my favourite, but while I'm expressing a preference like
everyone else in FVC does, I am very sure to always say that any PR model
will make me happy.  I walk around with the three systems at all times and
never show one without the other two.

Perhaps your favourite system is MMP, which is why you haven't been
bothered that for the last five years at the least, FVC has been 'selling'
MMP.

Are you sure you understand RU-PR though?  Because it isn't you get AV and
the rest of us get representation.  It isn't that at all.  You basically
get MMP if you are a single member constituency (which, Kitchener Conestoga
very likely wouldn't be.  I actually can't see how it can be.)

And I've already said I'm going to the New Hamburg meeting.

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Laurel L. Russwurm <laurel.l at russwurm.org>
wrote:

> As long as I have been listening to FVC the mantra has been: Fair Vote
> does not support a single system, but the principle of
> ProportionalRepresentation.
>
> Now FVC has not only designed its own system.
>
> As someone who knows well what it's like to be a rural person lacking
> representation, I hold a great deal of personal dislike for this particular
> system which I see as throwing rural folk under the bus in much the same
> way they were in the hybrid system we had for a time in parts of western
> Canada did.  So I complained a bit, and  I understand urban dwellers don't
> get it, but rural dwellers are in a minority, so it doesn't really matter
> as far as getting PR goes.   That said, I understand the reason for having
> such a system as a choice.
>
> The problem is Fair Vote seems to be running around actively selling its
> new system every chance it gets.  I get that... I understand people I know
> and respect have been actively involved in the system's development, and
> that these folks are proud of the system in which they have invested so
> much time and energy.
>
> At any other time it wouldn't be a biggie, but at *this* time what it is
> doing is distracting from getting PR.
>
> The biggest single issue with getting PR is that, even though most
> Canadians know something is wrong (why getting rid of FPTP resonates) most
> people don't know what is wrong.  People don't know the jargon, something
> made worse by the fact there are no standards so different people use
> different words for the same thing or the same words for different things.
> You can't even have a conversation without teaching the person you are
> talking to what the issue is even about.
>
> Which is why I see no value (and in fact, distinct detriment) in Fair Vote
> adding to the confusion by pushing a specific system.  As I understand it,
> system vs system factions contributed to the failure of the Ontario and 2nd
> BC electoral reform referenda.
>
> Teaching people basic STV and MMP is plenty to start with.  Getting
> tangled up in the weeds isn't good.
>
> It is fine for the Committee to take submissions on systems, but the ERRE
> Committee has some idea of what is being talked about.
>
> By pushing a specific system, FVC stops being a lobby group for ordinary
> Canadians and starts being a lobby group for FVC.
>
> Much as I dislike your Rural Urban thing, I will suffer with it if it is
> ultimately chosen (tho it replaces Mr Dion's P3 as my own pick for worst
> PR).  The poiny is *this is not the time for arguing specific systems*.
> This is the time for educating Canadians, this is the time for arguing the
> need to implement PR during THIS administration.
>
> Because if we don't get PR this time, I very much doubt we will get it at
> all.
>
> If you still don't understand why I see pushing your Urban-Rural system as
> having a serious potential to derail the chance of actually getting PR ,
> please go watch Proportional Representation vs. Alternative Vote
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu31U5fogzU&index=2&list=
> PL66aOelRZ1qsEgqfd2BbE1CLL7EeDTCZ7
>
> You don't have to watch the whole thing again, skip ahead to the audience
> questions where 2 people waylay the discussion by getting into the nitty
> gritty of the pet systems they developed.  Most of the audience was not
> remotely keen to go there (nor was the panel) and that was an audience that
> has some idea what is being talked about.  Even if they hadn't going in,
> Dennis Pilon explained it all nicely, so to start those folks would have
> been better off than the average Canadian who is listening and certainly
> confused by all this.
>
> It took me a couple of years before I understood PR well enough to talk
> about it; even then, it took another year before I discovered AV was the
> same as IRV.  (And another couple of years before I twigged to the act
> American electoral reformers lump IRV & STV together as Ranked Choice
> Voting... being able to use Cambridge's STV results to make AV city results
> look more diverse).
>
> Step away from your hobby horse, get out of the weeds and push for PR.
> There are too many people actively working to stall, delay, derail and
> generally make sure no meaningful electoral reform happens without Fair
> Vote muddying the water further.
>
> Bob tells me Fair Vote Waterloo is spending a pile of cash to bring Mr.
> Kingsley in.  Presumably to push his new system.  While I get that
> electoral reformers and political junkies may get a tingle at bringing in
> such a guest, frankly I doubt very much that the wider public will have a
> jot of interest.
>
> In light of everything else I've said above, you'll understand I might
> think this is not only a waste, but a detriment to what I want, which is
> getting PR.
>
> The worst is the fact you've scheduled this event to compete with (and
> this undermine) one of FVCwrc's own Public Library presentations.  I get
> that Waterloo Region Libraries only serve the rural population, I mean who
> cares about New Hamburg?  Well, I have to tell you, the New Hamburg
> Election Debate was the only debate where Conservative MP Harold Albrecht
> had to face an angry constituency.   You know, he's the only Waterloo
> Region MP who is NOT holding his own town hall or lifting a finger to
> inform his constituents.
>
> So, how many Fair Vote folk are going to go to New Hamburg to help deliver
> the Make Every Vote Count message when they can instead be political
> groupies at the Kingsley event instead?
>
> If you still don't get what I am saying, maybe this Winnipeg Free Press
> article will help:
>
> *Debate over electoral reform about values *
> http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/debate-
> over-electoral-reform-about-values-391834921.html
> <http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/debate-over-electoral-reform-about-values-391834921.html>
>
> I'm wondering if Fair Vote needs to figure out what it really wants.
>
> I know I want PR.
>
> Regards,
> Laurel Russwurm
>
> PS: I am not looking for an argument here.  I've said my piece; Fair Vote
> can ignore it or not.
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the fvc-wat-disc mailing list
> Post a message: fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
> Unsubscribe: http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc_
> listserv.thinkers.org
>
>

-- 
No other Western democratic country concentrates as much political power in
the hands of one person as Canada does with her Prime Minister.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.thinkers.org/pipermail/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org/attachments/20160901/0ca2fd1a/attachment-0002.htm>