Saturday, April 2, 2011


... The Chicken is trying to turn the page after he turned the other cheek and ran.
He laughingly tries to blame the per-vote subsidy in putting parliament on a regular election cycle.
That downplays the role of his own party, under Stephen Harper's own watch, that began with regular stunt bluster in calling everything a confidence motion, then launched into out-of-election advertising ad nauseum, which has resulted in the lead he holds today. Yep, no argument here, advertising when done slickly and abundantly, does work. At CON central tho, truth plays no factor.
He says parties are bankrolled for an election almost immediately following an election due to the Chretien implemented per-vote subsidy. As someone who's involved with local riding politics, I know for a fact that the rebates for the per-vote subsidy typically take two years to arrive. Another Harper lie.
That being said, I do agree that the per-vote subsidy should be tinkered with, even democratized.
If each ballot had another check box, this time at the bottom -- requesting the voter if they wished a $2 subsidy to go to the party of their choice -- it would enable those who don't like the subsidy to have their way. Also, there should be a proportional element that rewards parties that run more candidates; one-province parties should not receive the same amount of subsidy per-vote as a party that runs candidates (and meets the 5% threshhold) in 250+ ridings. Ring up the subsidy in 1/4s - 1/4 if you run candidates in 78 ridings or less; 1/2 of the amount if you run candidates in 156 ridings or under, etc.

No comments: