Voting Rights, Responsibilities and the Bitter Taste of Victory

Would this count as live-blogging? Considering it's been 45 minutes since the polls closed here in Alberta and every major news outlet has called the election for Ed Stelmach's Conservatives, I have a hard time considering what I'm doing now as anything more than a post-mortem.

Twenty-eight days have passed since the writ was dropped here in Alberta. Twenty-eight days of campaigning, and of talk of change. The Conservatives spoke of 'Change that Works'--not sure how 30+ years of single party rule can be considered 'Change that Works', but then again, no one ever said Alberta politics wasn't whack-a-doodle at times.

Over the last four weeks the Liberals have put on a strong show of the sort of change and government they would provide Alberta--the change that I truly believe works. Kevin Taft, the Liberal leader actually seemed like Premier material at times in this campaign. Compared to Steady-Eddie Stelmach--who's only hope in front of a camera is to continue to parrot his talking points--Brian Mason of the NDP looks Premier-like. Mason however, was like his mirror-image of the right--Paul Hinman of the Wild Rose Alliance, the Mitt Romney of Alberta--nothing but a spoiler, more apt to split votes than gain any traction.

Yet for all the platform and policy, and yes, even charisma of Taft and the Liberals, they had one fatal flaw--they were Liberals. Here in Alberta you'd make more political hay calling yourself the Sheep-Shagging Party--you might get a small sympathy vote from sheep-shaggers. Liberals? Aren't they the high-falutin' fellers from Toronto trying to steal our oil?

Sadly, the only hope Taft ever really had was to have a vast swath of Conservative voters stay home tonight. It's sad and ironic to think that to finally get a sane and just government in Alberta, you have to root for voter apathy, or voter suppression.

In my case, I rather ignored the rooting and got more to the thinking--which is something I'm better at anyway (every time I cheer for the Flames they loose, so rooting just doesn't seem to work for me).

Last election in Alberta (2004) voter turnout was 44% (or there-abouts). I'm a strong believer that democracy requires participation (and education) and I began wondering how could you increase voter turnout in general? Australia fines people $20 if they fail to vote--but as a single Dad my philosophy is more carrot than stick, and I figured maybe if you provide an incentive to get people out to vote, they might actually take their responsibilities seriously.

Now buying votes is bad (and quite illegal in most civilized jurisdictions), but I thought that maybe if government provided a tax rebate--and a significant one--to people if they voted, it might actually work (and not count as vote buying any more than Stelmach throwing money at the electorate prior to the election). Sure if you gave everyone who votes a 5% rebate on their income tax, the more people vote the more it costs the taxman (receipts go down)--but isn't that a small price to pay? Besides, in Alberta, it may just cause the governing Conservatives some grief--they'd be torn between collecting more money to pad their salaries, versus getting their supporters out to elect them so as to allow them to collect said salary in the first place.

Heck, if this idea ever got off the ground, I say let the rebate count for every year in between elections--you vote in 2008, then you get a rebate in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011. You'd have to vote again in 2012 to keep getting your rebate cheque. Lets even name it after Stelmach--we had Ralph Bucks, why not Eddie Pennies?

Sadly though, it seems that the Conservatives got their supporters out--the Liberals are in retreat from 16 seats to a projected 8. The victory of voter participation has ensured another four years of Conservative stupidity--no affordable housing, skyrocketing prices, and oil patch royalty rip-offs.

Aye, that's democracy. Don't you just love it?

Cheers,

Sean