On October 26, this Ipsos Reid Poll of Canadian voters was released. It shows that if the Parliamentary election were being held now, the decided voters would break down this way: Conservative 40%, Liberal 25%, New Democratic Party 13%, Green 11%, Bloc Quebecois 11%.
The undecided voters amount to 6% of the electorate.
Canada is probably the most similar nation to the United States. Canada does not use proportional representation. Nevertheless, because Canada has equal and lenient ballot access laws, equal campaign finance laws, and somewhat inclusive debates, Canada has vigorous minor parties, some of whom occasionally win control of various Provincial governments. Canada’s example shows that the party system in the United States is not natural, but is a product of discriminatory laws and practices. These discriminatory laws and practices did not exist in the 18th or 19th centuries, and by no means were sanctioned by the founding fathers. These discriminatory practices began in the early twentieth century.
Canada also has strong regional cultural differences allowing a regional third party (Bloc) to exist more easily. I might also guess that Canada has smaller constituencies, although I’m not positive.
That said, I agree Richard, election law plays a big role in creating the 2-party dominated system in the states, just as it also plays a role in shaping partisan politics even in Canada
Canada also has a different (more liberal) Bill of Rights that the courts have found to strongly protect the the right to vote and to be voted for.
SMALL DISTRICTS – A key to free elections. In the 19th Century the USA was a true multi-party democracy seeing the easy rise and fall of many different parties.
Richard is indeed correct. The present political system is the one engineered by corporate sponsored progressives in the late 19th and early 20th century. It explains how Wall Street came to own the government at all levels they think matter. Most local politicians know who larders out the butter for their bread.
For example, a small rural community here in Oklahoma, Minco, wants to spiff up its image to attract corporate employers. What does the corporate suitor want first? Stop letting people live in mobile homes inside the city limits. Eventually the corporatist will be demand property tax payers (captives) build all the infrastructure the corps deem worthy. An infrastructure they will abandon in a few years leaving the debt with the local gullible yokels. So much for public-private partnerships. Payrolls are transient and portable, debt lingers like the stench of rotting corpse.
All the regimes in Canada are EVIL monarchy-oligarchy regimes due to the EVIL combination of gerrymanders, plurality elections [aka First Past the Post — a moronic phrase from horse-racing] and the parliamentary system of having the same persons have both legislative and executive powers — i.e. the ROT carried over from Great Britain in the 1760s — now circa 250 years ago.
Due to having 3-5 larger parties in each election, there is about 20-22 percent indirect minority rule in each regime (versus about 30-32 percent in U.S.A. gerrymander elections).
The party hack prime / first ministers are de facto powermad monarchs – dictators.
The English – French chaos may blow up Canada at any time — with the U.S.A. regime certain to intervene.
P.R. and A.V.
Canada does have much smaller constituencies, with 308 seats in the House of Commons for a population of approximately 30 million, so each MP represents about 100,000 people vs over 500,000 in the US house.
One difference is that none of the parties are granted official statys the way the Democratic and Republican parties are here. Each parties leader is chosen at a convention in which only active party members participate, as opposed to everyone who feels a vague affiliation. Parties that choose leaders acceptable to the voters do well; those that don’t suffer.
Voters are not carried on the roles under any party.
The regional differences help some parties and hurt others. They have greatly exaggerated the power of the Bloc, because all of its votes are in one province (and mostly outside Montreal). Thus they have 47 seats, while the NDP has only 36 and the Greens none, because their support is spread throughout the country.
That is good news. The total for all of the parties other than the Conservative Party comes to 60%!
Call for a national, Progressive Party in the United States. (We tried to get it started in 1976; is anyone interested in picking up where we left off – due to lack of interest back then?)
Below is a copy of a short letter that I wrote yesterday:
Dear Family Members and Friends,
“Before the Deluge†(from the album “Late for the Sky†— Jackson Browne; 1974 Asylum Records):
“Let the music keep our spirits high,
Let the buildings keep our children dry …â€
The editorial in the latest Sacramento News and Review (10-22-09) leads off with these words: “The most important number in the world? It’s 350, as in parts per million carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.†The message continues, “Two years ago, NASA scientist James Hansen – the man who first testified before Congress 20 years ago that the activity of human beings was causing global warming – put a finite, bottom-line number on the climate-change crisis. If there is carbon dioxide in the atmosphere greater than 350 parts per million, he said, it will lead inexorably to a condition that would no longer be ‘compatible with the planet on which civilization developed or to which life on Earth is adapted.’ . . . ; [the editorial goes on to say that] The Earth’s number is already slightly above 350 ppm,†and mentions that the “Arctic sea is melting at a disturbing rate, and the Earth’s oceans are becoming acidified. Glaciers are in rapid retreat and even slightly hotter temperatures have brought on wrenching drought in some places and massive flooding in others.â€
Well, with that being the case and with all of the other problems that the Earth’s “civilization†has, it makes me wonder why the United Nations has not started construction of a very large Star Ship to orbit the Earth in conjunction with the International Space Station and be ready to blast off into the unknown at such a time that the dire predictions for “2012†begin to happen in earnest. It also makes me wonder, even more, about the lack of cooperation among the various and small groups of progressive forces in our country. I still believe, though, that the Republican Party will be a minor-sized party by the year 2012. If that prediction turns out to be true, there will be some group (hopefully progressive) that will enter into the void and compete with the Democratic Party. That (birth of the new Party at or around the year 2012) would give the new Party time to grow strong and be able to field a presidential and vice-presidential ticket in 2016.
Sam Webb’s (he is the Chairperson of the Communist Party USA) essay, “The New Normal,†[posted to http://www.peoplesworld.org] states that : “At this moment, political strength, moral authority, and public opinion tilts in the direction of the new administration and the broader movement that elected him [President Barack Obama], but not to the extent that it is able to win such radical economic reforms (federally directed development [which] could encourage municipal and regional authorities to plan and organize major projects as well as channel investment dollars to small and medium sized businesses and worker/community cooperatives, assuming for the moment that everyone sees their necessity. That task lies ahead.”)
It seems clear to me what our task should begin with: The creation of a national, Progressive Party; a Party that would field local candidates in 2010, 2012, and 2014, and then nominate a presidential and vice-presidential slate in 2016. Hopefully, for human beings (and other living things on this planet), there will still be a viable Earth at that time.
“Live long and prosper.â€
Phil
Please forward as you wish.
Philippe L. Sawyer
Creating Utopia!
1. Again. The Canadaian supreme court have seen their role in election law as one of protecting individual liberties where as the US supreme court has come to the opposite conclusion.
2. Until we address ballot access laws, it is difficult to call America a two-party system because the proper role of Independent and minor parties cannot really exist. From my own experience, I have found that interest group based coalitions can be very effective in building a diverse, broad based movement that can successfully advance legislation.
Yet, petty egos get in the way as does this notion that such change will come AFTER the Constitution, Green, Libertarian, Communist, Socialist, magically sweeps to electoral victory.
3. Well, their have been several attempts to build a progressive third party movement in America…often with some celebrity-type presidential candidate who is probably looking for some fame and fortune more then anything else.
Bottom line, part of the reason why we have harsh ballot access laws is that alot of people either dont know and or dont really care.
If you want to change things, you need to be able to get a interest group coalition together (with major party, minor party and independents) that can lobby the people who are actually in power.
Minor mystery — how come the top 2 parties in Canada early on did NOT smash any developing third parties — i.e. copy the stuff that the Donkeys and Elephants did in the 1890s ???
I agree with the previous comments that added regional concentration of support and district size to Richard’s list of differences between the U.S. and Canada. There’s one more important difference that hasn’t been mentioned here: Canada does not have a directly-elected executive branch. Instead, Parliament picks the chief executive (called the prime minister). I believe that this also helps foster a multi-party rather than a two-party system. When the largest party doesn’t have a majority (which is routine in Canada), even a handful of seats in Parliament makes you a player in determining whether the current government survives or a new election must be called. If Canada required a majority vote of Parliament to name the prime minister (and therefore coalition governments), this effect would be even more pronounced than it is. Instead, they routinely have one-party governments and frequent elections.
In presidential systems like the U.S. the most important election (for the chief executive office) is inherently winner-take-all. This reinforces all of the other factors promoting a partisan duopoly, including ballot access laws.