Tuesday, April 26, 2011

None Of Your Lip

I'd be more inclined to support mandatory voting if every ballot included the choice of None Of The Above. To make this choice would be more constructive than to destroy one's ballot, would send a sobering message to those who did not earn the "X" and, I dare say, give legions of voters a chance to finally vote according to their true sentiments.
--Bruce Rhodes, as published in The Globe and Mail, 4/26/11

Letters like the above drive me around the friggin' bend.

It's a given that I will endure the blatting of this particular 'none of the above' opinion at least ten times every election campaign. It's usually offered as an ironclad justification for a refusal to vote at all; if not, it's a whiny-voiced "do I have to?" that takes me right back to kindergarten.
What I NEVER hear hard on its heels is some description, any description at all, of the apparently legendary beast called

A POLITICIAN WORTH VOTING FOR

We all have a picture of this fairy tale creature in our heads, according to our political leanings. What's most fascinating about A POLITICIAN WORTH VOTING FOR, at least to me, is that you'll never know you've found one until after you vote for it.

Consider: all politicians make promises. A POLITICIAN WORTH VOTING FOR keeps them, to the best of his/her ability. We're all sick of promises, but they are unfortunately the coin of the realm of Campaign. Would anyone vote for a politician who said something like "I can't make any promises?"
Our Premier in Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, came closest to this an election ago when he announced "I won't cut your taxes, but I won't raise them either". I respected that pledge and almost voted for it. Pity he almost immediately inflicted the largest tax grab in provincial history. It's that kind of about-face that disillusions voters and makes them long for None Of The Above.
But consider Mike Harris. He was a polarizing figure in Ontario politics from day one: he took the province hard to starboard and in the process demonized large swathes of the population, most notably teachers and those on welfare. The thing about Harris that his detractors would like to forget is that he was re-elected with a majority. Why? Principally, I believe, because he kept damn near every promise he made. My own politics have taken a dramatic left turn since I voted for Harris in '95, but I'd still say Harris exemplified A POLITICIAN WORTH VOTING FOR on the grounds that he said what he was going to do...and then did it.
There are still many people in Ontario lo these sixteen years later who believe Harris ruined the province. Yet there remains the matter of that pesky second majority. Mulroney, another hated politician from the Right, got a second majority as well. Likewise, McGuinty himself was re-elected comfortably despite breaking roughly, um, all of his promises. Obviously there's more to this POLITICIAN WORTH VOTING FOR business than keeping your word.

There have been other POLITICIANS WORTH VOTING FOR, at every level since time out of mind; they exist today in large numbers. The fact is that a few admittedly smelly scandals have tarnished the image of politicians everywhere, but most of that breed are hard working and honest people doing what they believe is best.

I like to engage these "None Of The Above" folks whenever I find them. Sadly, they usually don't want to be engaged. They'll spout something like "they're all crooks and liars" or "they only care about themselves" and stalk away, disgusted. And then, like as not, they don't vote. That contributes to the broken system we have, wherein a party can get a majority government with far less than majority support.

Putting aside the fact that nobody is going to conform utterly to your political views except yourself--maybe you should run?--would you, a None Of The Above supporter, ever even recognize a suitable candidate if one appeared in front of you?

2 comments:

Rocketstar said...

The only wat "none of the above" shoudl be added is IF 'none of the above" wins, all candidates that lost can not run again and you need a new set. Risk is never electing anyone because as you say, they are all unworthy.

Does Canada have the same "money runs politics" issue just as we do? Do you have PAC's, corp's giving $ to politicians etc...?

Ken Breadner said...

In short, no. Corporations and unions can donate to parties or individuals, to a maximum of $1000. Citizens can donate as they please, and get a tax break for so doing. And any party with more than 2% of the vote gets federal funding per vote cast. I believe it's something like $1.75 a vote. Bear in mind that our campaigns last a little over a month and their costs are a fraction of yours.