A few posts ago I mentioned the seemingly absurd situation in Newfoundland that allows people to vote weeks before the election has even officially been called or candidates are recognized as candidates
A recent news story about one candidate breaking fundraising rules has brought another aspect of this situation to my attention. For over a month voters are voting but candidates are not allowed to raised funds and engage in a full-fledged campaign. This seems a little less than ideal.
Though it is unlikely, one could theoretically lose the election before they are even nominated or allowed to raise a dollar.
This sounds like a great system. It's like buying a lottery ticket after the numbers have been drawn.
This voting before candidates are nominated or officially fully functioning candidates thing has to stop. It just isn't reasonable to allow this type of situation to exist. Not only does it give a huge advantage to the incumbent (particularly if they are a minister), but it creates a situation where there is a huge incentive to break the rules and begin campaigning early.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Are you going to forward this to some one that can make a difference in the policy?
I wasn't planning on it. After this was posted I saw someone else raise a similar point, so I am going to assume that the issue is out there.
That being said, it is possible that a more active approach would be useful in this situation.
An obvious answer would be to replace elections with "draws" in which the name of every one of Her Majesty's subjects would be thrown into the hopper leading to just one name being drawn on "selection day".
If you accept the notion of a fair and random draw, this would even out the proportionate number of lawyers, for example, in parliament . . . or weyfare queens, for that matter -- even francophones, baymen & townies.
Post a Comment