SOUND OFF: Rothenburger column shows support for archaic, non-representative electoral systems
-
Share on Facebook
-
Share on Bluesky
-
Share on X
- Copy Link
WELL, I’VE GOT TO GIVE IT TO MEL for standing tall on his support for both the US Electoral College and BC’s First Past the Post. Mel is one of a dwindling number of people who are still holding out for systems designed in and for the 1800s.
Over the past few decades, a majority of US citizens have opposed the Electoral College as it no longer applies. “The founding fathers established the Electoral College as a means to balance the desires of some for the direct election of the president with that of others who felt Congress should elect the president.” This in a time when “the average voter would have little opportunity to educate himself (yes, himself) on the candidates — assuming they could even read.”
Similarly in Canada, a consistent majority of voters support moving away from FPTP, a system which works when only two parties run. With more than two parties on the ballot, a proportional system much better reflects the popular vote while offering voters more choice.
Mel shows his cards when he laments that “the high-population urban areas will dominate the outcome.” All PR systems suggested for BC have offered local representation, as doing away with it is just non-negotiable. That urban areas are more densely populated is a fact, whether we use FPTP or a proportional system.
