Student Voice 7 James Mangan Team Member oO this election, I have heard one question repeated by everyone from students to older volunteers: why should I vote? When they ask this question, they aren’t asking “What’s the point in voting,” but rather “Why do Canadians vote?” Is it to support the party that presents a national agenda that best aligns with their personal values, or is it to elect a local representative who can best represent the interests of the constituency? I have heard many people bring up the scenario, “What if 1 like the party, but don’t like the candidate.” or vice versa. Many claim this to be a problem with Canadian democracy. I’ve always disagreed that this is a problem. I would argue that this decision between party and representative is healthy for a strong democracy, since it requires the voter to comprehend the exact role of the representative, and the place said representative will play at the national level. However, Canadians must address that there exists a general lack of understanding regarding the exact role of a federal MP. The economy ranks as the number one issue for this election, but it’s the local economy that Canadian voters prioritize. This distinction was visible during the All-Candidates Debate hosted by CBC’s Daybreak on September 30th. Candidates were asked a question that represents a general lack of understanding regarding Canadian federalism: forestry. The candidates were asked to comment on how each of their parties would address the lasting impacts of the Pine Beetle Epidemic that ravaged British Columbia’s wilderness, the impacts of which are still being felt today. The candidates took this opportunity to discuss their national priorities to protect British Columbia’s Forestry and Timber industry. NDP candidate Trent Derrick discussed the need for i Opinion: Separating “Party” from “Politician” innovation in forestry and mill technology, while Independent candidate Sheldon Clare discussed the need to promote research and education of the industry in order to “integrate our economy.” Only the Liberal candidate, Tracy Calogheros, pointed out that primary extraction in the forestry industry falls under provincial jurisdiction, not federal. In CBC Daybreak’s defense, the question focusing on the Pine Beetle Epidemic referenced the Conservative’s failure to deliver on a 2006 campaign promise to fund $1 billion to the region to counter the economic devastation of the epidemic. The Conservatives promised to contribute $100 million annually over the following decade, but only followed through on two payments. However, it seems inappropriate that a local resource issue which falls under provincial jurisdiction would be presented rather than an issue of federal significance, CBC funding being the obvious example considering they hosted the forum. The Cariboo-Prince George riding wants to vote for candidates who can have more control over the local economy. In this sense, the riding seems to want elections similar to those found in the United States, less the outrageous, controversial, and bizarre candidates. The United States has a very weak practice of enforcing party whips in their government, which allows representatives in the Congress and Senate to vote in accordance with their constituencies rather than their party. This means that federal representatives can prioritize the economic interests of their ridings. It may sound ideal, but this practice has the ability to impede upon popular legislation. In the wake of the Sandy Hook school shooting, President Obama advocated for a gun control initiative that would primarily expand the background checks oS Z — conducted on purchasers of firearms. American polls found that 90% of Americans supported the expansion of background checks. However, Democratic senators who feared electoral repercussions in their constituencies voted against the bill, and contributed to its defeat. The lack of a party whip resulted in the failure of legislation supported by 9/10 Americans. Having a strong Party Whip requires Canadian Members of Parliament to balance the interests of their constituencies with the party they represent. Canadians need to examine which party best reflects their personal values, and then balance this consideration with said party’s local representative. This is a lot to ask for in a voter, and can often lead to acrisis of faith in a party supporter. The very fact that a voter is considering this balance shows a practice of critical analysis, and often requires further exploration on behalf of the voter regarding the different parties’ electoral promises. The Canadian voter has a lot more work than the American voter, but the end result is a much more engaged voter, and therefore a stronger democracy with more confident representatives. Alternatively, electoral reform is a major issue for this approaching election. One of the options that Canadians may have on the table after October 19th includes preferential balloting, which would allow Canadians to rank the local representatives in order from most to least preferred. Canadians would be able to vote for their preferred representative, and reserve their favorite party for a second preferred option or vice versa. Under this system, the voter’s choice between the representative and the party would be a little easier to make knowing that a secondary option is available.