The Importance Of Voter Participation In Canada

Political scientists have made tremendous efforts in discovering what factors influence the voting turnouts. Irrefutably within any country, older citizens and those with higher education and income are more likely to participate in elections; this possibly explains the partisanship, a method of the “ill-informed,” displayed along the east coast, for the educational requirements attributed to these provinces are less than the Canadian national average (Garnier , 2006). When an election has closely contested parties there is a higher voter turnout, for citizens believe that their votes will make more of a difference. In Canada it has been proven that citizens are more likely to vote in national elections than in municipal elections; municipal elections typically garner less than 50% of the voting populace’s support, while national elections have never experienced less than a 60% turnout (Heard, 2011). Proportional representation has been associated with higher voter turnouts; as opposed to Single member plurality systems, the system used in Canada, where voters feel their efforts to make a difference are futile due to the “First

To every political system there are many positives and negatives and one critique of compulsory voting systems is that informal and uninterested voting is increased. It has been advocated that compulsory voting brings a large amount of “uninterested voters” to the polls and in turn cast votes that are clearly inconsistent with their own political values compared to those who are more informed and motivated voluntary voters (Selb and Latchat, 2009). In this case the primary concern is when people are forced to vote they will either pick a candidate at random or spoil their ballot which consequently, does not make the outcome of the election representative of the people’s interests. If certain individuals are not interested in politics they should not be forced to contribute in one of the most salient political statements practiced in Canada (Selb and Latchat, 2009). They have the right to choose their level of political participation.

Canada’s friendly neighbor to the South, the US, has an electoral system that is composed of 3 separate elections, one of them deciding the head of state. The president elected by the people and he or she is the determining person of the country’s political system. In the US runs like a majority system” In Canada, however, elections are held slightly differently. Citizens vote for a Member of Parliament in a 308-seat house and candidates win not by a majority, unlike in the US, but by a plurality. This means that a candidate can actually win by simply having more votes than the other candidates. This method of representative democracy, in general, does not cause too much controversy in a global scope but has

“From 1972 to 2012, citizens 18-29 turned out at a rate 15 to 20 points lower than citizens 30 years older” from this data we can conclude that age is a demographic that affects voter turnout (What Affects Voter Turnout). Voting laws such as those of identification or registration impact voter turnout. For example, the introduction of early voting was meant to increase voter turnout, but has in fact decreased turnout (What Affects Voter Turnout). In response to the argument that the system lowers voter turnout rate, one should take the many other variables that contribute to turnout into account.

The issue of electoral reform has become more important than ever in Canada in recent years as the general public has come to realize that our current first-past-the-post, winner-take-all system, formally known as single-member plurality (SMP) has produced majority governments of questionable legitimacy. Of the major democracies in the world, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom are the only countries that still have SMP systems in place. Interestingly enough, there has been enormous political tension and division in the last few years in these countries, culminating with the election results in Canada and the USA this year that polarized both countries. In the last year we have seen

Although Canadian electoral system has always undergone periodic reforms, new challenges always accompany electoral changes and therefore the system should be consistently reformed to meet new circumstances.The current electoral system in Canada is a product of a series of electoral changes that have always taken place since the foundation of the Canadian confederation in the mid 1880s. During the early years, the rights of individuals to vote were significantly limited as only white males had the right to vote but only after meeting certain requirements. A secret ballot was unheard, and it was only after a number of changes were implemented that all social groups in Canada were given the right to vote. Even after these changes, electoral

The most important issue in relation to the Canadian electoral process is the debate over whether or not the state should implement electoral reform for federal elections. It is my stance that replacing the Single Member Plurality system (SMP) with the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) is undeniably in the best interest of Canadians, and I will attempt to prove this by contrasting The Limits: Electoral Systems and Electoral Reform - Or How I Came to Love SMP by Christopher Kam, who believes in the current SMP system, and Getting What You Vote For by John Hiemstra, who pushes for a change in favour of the MMP system. This paper will conclude with further critical analysis, as well as my justified stance the MMP system is clearly superior.

Franklin. The theory proposed in this article is “elections that do not stimulate high turnout among young adults leave a ‘footprint’ of low turnout in the age structure of the electorate” (Franklin, 2004). The methodology involved examine the voting patterns of 22 countries that have held elections continuously since 1945. This number total 356 elections and provides a strong pool of data to draw conclusions from. The results brought forth a number of different variables that impact voter turnout. Such variables are the frequency at which elections are held - the closer together equates to a decrease in turnout, to the impact of lowering the eligible voting age. Interesting any country that lowered the voting age can expect to see a drop of 3.8% in a span of 40 years (Franklin, 2004). Additionally the analysis discovered that the Baby Boomers, which earlier were stated to be 20% more active voters in Canada, are 7% less likely to vote globally than their parenting generation. The conclusion for this article is that there is a reduction in the competitive nature of elections (less likely to bring about policy changes), and a decrease in the age when voters become eligible. Both of these declines generate an environment where the younger

are presently 4 cabinet ministers of Sikh backgrounds, and this is over 10% of the

Canada is known to be one of the best places to live (Lauren O'Neil 2015), especially to outsiders that do not live in Canada. The issue is, from the outside, Canada is great politically compared to third world countries surviving through conflict or against Donald Trump’s ideology in the United States. This is true in a sense, but from the inside, Canadians are allowing their democracy to deteriorate and if this route continues it raises the question: will Canada still be one of these great places to live in the future? Therefore, I argue in the book; Tragedy in the Commons by Allison Loat and Michael Macmillan is informative and compelling, seeking to provoke citizens to partake in more political participation to maintain Canada’s falling

Throughout Canada’s history, citizens have had an interest in electoral reform. The issue has been continuously brought up in both national and provincial elections for the last couple of decades. Does this mean Canadians are unsatisfied with the current first past the post system or does it mean that they are just following the ‘trend’ that has been brought forward? This question has recently been acknowledged by the government of New Brunswick and as such, has produced a discussion on whether it is a necessary for the province to participate in a referendum to reform its electoral system.

Every four years, on the third Monday, in October, Canadians take part in elections ("Canada Federal Election 2015." ). Candidates go around within their electoral district to talk about the ideas they have and changes they hope to change. The position that candidates are running for, is to become part of the House of Commons ("House of Commons of Canada."). Elections are going to take place on Monday, October 19, 2015; voters can go to the polls and vote for candidates that will represent them ("Canada Federal Election 2015." ). Canada has fixed elections in order to have election on a regular cycle, but can occur before the “said date” ("Fixed Election Dates In Canada."). Overall, elections for House of Commons are preferred to occur,

Democracy is an important fundamental aspect of changing the electoral system. In Ontario, the provincial governments called a referendum after poorly educating the masses on electoral reform. Many electoral systems were mentioned but the majority believed that MMP (mixed-member) could be easily implemented. The author suggests that electoral reform often fails in Canada because of the many problems that arise: negative media portrayal of electoral reform, an uneducated mass (on the topic of electoral systems), and diminishing government enthusiasm. The article states why electoral reform in Canada fails and why democracy needs to play an important role in the development of an electoral system that represents every Canadian citizens viewpoint.

Since the 1860s, Canada’s voter turn-out has generally declined, however, the decline in voter turn-out in the last several elections is one of great concern to Canada’s democracy. As a result, mandatory voting has gained the attention of many political scientists and political analysts. While there are good reasons to worry about Canadians’ diminishing voter turn-out, it is also fair to say that mandatory voting will not prove beneficial to the future of Canada’s democracy. Although mandatory voting will increase the voter turn-out, it will not create an informed voter base and neither raise a more politically knowledgeable society. Making voting compulsory is accompanied by both positive and negative outcomes, but in Canada, many fear that the negative outcomes outweigh the positives.

If the canadian government want more people to vote they should view their own results why people don’t vote. According to stats canada the second main reason why people don’t vote is because they are too busy to vote. Why should the government force on the people the job of