Dermod Travis: Suppressing HST vote no way to regain trust of B.C. voters

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      By Dermod Travis

      B.C. premier Christy Clark once described the way Gordon Campbell imposed the HST as “sneaky”. Little did British Columbians know at the time, but they hadn't even seen anything yet when it came to sneaky.

      With close to 3.5 million ballots being mailed to voters this week, strategists with the B.C. Liberal party have launched a frontal assault on B.C. democracy by employing virtually every trick in a sorcerer's handbook to suppress voter turnout in order to increase the odds that the HST will survive this summer's referendum.

      Their tactics—among many—include changing the date of the original September 24 referendum to hold the vote in the lazy days of summer instead, throwing voters a curve ball question that requires them to vote Yes to say No, and then asking them to “mail it in”.

      It's not a coincidence that voters are rarely called to the polls in July or August. Indeed, the last time British Columbians were asked to vote in summer was on August 1, 1952, when W.A.C. Bennett was first elected.

      The second trick: that school-yard favourite: “Heads I win, tails you lose.”

      Normally, when someone asks a question the positive choice comes first, as in: “Are you for or against it?”

      The HST referendum breaks this rule by putting the negative option—scrapping the HST—the positive choice, as in: Are you in favour of extinguishing the HST (Harmonized Sales Tax) and reinstating the PST (Provincial Sales Tax) in conjunction with the GST (Goods and Services Tax)?

      So instead of voting “no” to the HST—as groups who oppose the HST have said for months with slogans such as “Vote No” or “No to the HST”—voters who want to scrap the HST must now vote “yes”.

      It's wording that is intended to confuse British Columbians. At the very least, the first eight words of the question are manipulative.

      In fact, research conducted by American political scientist David Magleby found that up to 20 percent of voters cast mistaken votes when asked to vote “yes” to oppose a proposition.

      In one California initiative, a referendum on preserving rent controls, Magleby found that 23 percent who supported rent controls mistakenly voted against them and 54 percent who opposed controls voted for them.

      The third trick in the BC government's handbook: “Mailing it in”.

      A few U.S. states already use mail-in ballots, but a number of political scientists see voting by mail as a way to suppress votes.

      Oregon has witnessed a continual decrease in turnout since the introduction of “vote-by-mail.” And in California when elections included referendums or initiatives, those who voted in person were more likely to vote on these issues than those who mailed it in.

      B.C. has had one mail-in referendum. Only 790,182 or less than 37 percent of eligible voters dropped their ballot in the mailbox. Of those, over 26,000 ballots were rejected.

      While mail-in ballots may be cost-effective, they don't produce a higher turnout by those who normally abstain or provide a fair representation of all voting groups in a society.

      Usually, it's the higher educated who will sort through conflicting views in a referendum to make a decision.

      Others are at a disadvantage when voting by mail: those with no fixed address, those who are functionally illiterate, new Canadians who may not sufficiently understand the common language, or those with little time to consider the issue.

      Many British Columbians may believe that politicians would never manipulate voter behaviour to suppress turnout. Nonetheless, voters can't afford to ignore the reality that such tactics work when a government wants to foist an unpopular policy onto its citizens.

      Not since U.S. Republican strategist Ed Rollins allegedly suppressed the turnout of black voters in the 1993 New Jersey governor’s race by paying black voters to sit at home on election day, have citizens witnessed such a blatant attempt by a government to pass not just one, but a series of curve balls by its own citizens.

      Don't let political machinations disenfranchise you. And after Gordon Campbell's last campaign promise on the HST, don't fall for Premier Clark's pig in a poke this time round.

      Get the facts from both the Yes and No sides. Then vote for what you believe is best for British Columbia.

      Dermod Travis is the managing director of IntegrityBC.

      Comments

      17 Comments

      Mark Montigue

      Jun 9, 2011 at 2:12pm

      This article is factually inaccurate (and yet still posted?).
      No, i'm not a Liberal or HST supporter, just someone who is tired of either side changing the facts to suit their own cases.
      For example, the author above notes that the government set up the language as 'Vote Yes to kill the HST' when in fact it was the anti-HST group under Bill who provided the wording, including the word "extinguish'.
      Secondly, it is factually proven that a mail-in vote yields higher returns on referendums, in particular amongst rural voters outside of Vancouver where the anti-HST is strongest. Those on both sides including the media should stick to the facts. It would help everyone better understand which way to vote.

      Mark Fornataro

      Jun 9, 2011 at 3:00pm

      Sounds like we need a Clarity Act for the wording of this referendum.

      Let Me Help You Here Christie

      Jun 9, 2011 at 3:46pm

      I think what you mean is "Deceptive" and "Sneaky" well that sums you up real well.

      you can do better

      Jun 9, 2011 at 4:13pm

      Why is the GS posting this weak article? If you can't even read the referendum question or use a mailbox, then you can't understand the pros and cons of the tax options, so do us a favour and don't vote.

      There are lots of big issues with HST, including the real cost per average family (it's not just $350). Show us some real analysis.

      KTFO

      Jun 9, 2011 at 4:13pm

      Gordo in a Dress? :)

      Martin Dunphy

      Jun 9, 2011 at 4:57pm

      You can do better:

      The above article is a freelance commentary submission.
      If you'd like to read something with "real analysis" of the HST, may I direct you to our convenient search box at the top of the page?
      If you search our site, you'll find 405 Straight stories that mention the HST.
      I'm sure at least one of them will contain the information you seek.
      Have a nice day.

      Fact Check

      Jun 10, 2011 at 6:35am

      "Usually, it's the higher educated who will sort through conflicting views in a referendum to make a decision." I just love the derogatory way this statement is used ... as if ill-informed voting is somehow virtuous.

      HellSlayerAndy

      Jun 10, 2011 at 9:53am

      Suppression or just out and out fraud?

      1) est. polls in the public's mind that the vote is closer than people think, so the final vote tally seems authentic
      2) only the gov't KNOWS how many ballots are ultimately printed, sent out or sitting in apartment lobbies with RTS written on them (Attention! Property Managers!)
      3) given low turnout and low registration, there is no way for people who DIDN'T vote to find out whether a vote was registered on their behalf anyway.
      4) fluid ballot returns with an ambiguous deadline made even more ambiguous for the fact people will be waiting for ballots that wanted to vote -- realized they didn't get one -- contact the gov't number and then WAIT again and probably miss the official deadline. The Gov't could easily play the odds and short ridings and postal codes with technical difficulties.
      5) nearly two months to COUNT them electronically which can't be scrutinized easily and managers can still get progress reports on where the vote stands -- lots of time to FIND ballots that were missed.

      The Business community didn't send their Golden Boy Gordo for the high jump only to lose a vote to the PUBLIC.

      Jacob de Raadt

      Jun 10, 2011 at 6:13pm

      Moving the 12% goalposts to 10% while a goal is being scored, is dirty. Even the Boston Bruins would not stoop that low.

      ds

      Jun 10, 2011 at 9:06pm

      I've heard time and time again how wonderfull the HST is for the province and what it will do for us but no one tells how it will work to do this. Anyone can say it will make jobs etc but tell us how. I think all they really wanted is the money from the feds and to hell with the people who have to pay the extra taxes.