What if?

[armyguy62]

I hope this hasn't been proposed before..... what if Armed Forces members voted (Federally ) where they were posted, rather than where they joined? I expect a great many members still vote in their "home riding". IF the majority of service members sided with one candidate (in most ridings with a base) they would likely carry that person. There are enough ridings in Canada that still have a CF base OR have CF members (posted to local CF bases) that any Federal party will pay attention. Thoughts?

 

[Shamrock]

We have the choice to vote where we reside or where we were recruited from.  Although I don't invest a lot of time asking other troops where they vote, I suspect your theory about where the majority vote may be wrong.

Furthermore, in the instances where the majority of voters in a riding are military, I doubt there is a lawful way to get every service member to vote for one particular candidate; we're all different and all see politics in our own ways. 

 

[armyguy62]

You are right, and I did not intend for it to mean a "union" where we voted as a group. What I was getting at was that (at least in the late 80's/early90's) most single (and a significant # of married, by my own anecdotal survey) servicemembers voted in their home town. All I am suggesting is, if suddenly, the majority of servicemembers in a riding (usually surrounding a base) registered as wishing to vote locally it would be noticed. I would not suggest a block vote, but (I would think) most service members (and spouses) tend to have the same political views.

 

[aesop081]

but (I would think) most service members (and spouses) tend to have the same political views.

Far from it

 

[Old Sweat]

In the Hellyer years the option of changing one's place of ordinary residence was changed to not allow members of the forces to select a riding that they did not have a personal relationship with. A member of the forces could change one's riding of residence riding effective 1 January, but this as altered to ensure en bloc tranfers could not effect the result in a selected riding, like Paul's.

What do the regulations allow now?

 

[armyguy62]

That is pretty much my point.... the gov't does not want a large population to hold sway over certain small ridings, thereby carrying a relatively large vote (did that make sense??)  I know we were all told that it was meant to keep us in touch with our original ridings, but consider.........  wouldn't it make sense for the fed's to keep large groups of (generally) like minded people from voting as a group? Imagine ( Edmonton, Petawawa, Ottawa, Gagetown, Halifax, for example...) ridings where the Gov't knew there was likely a consensus and so they would either appeal to those voters or suffer the consequences. I'm just pondering......

 

[Michael OLeary]

Having all CF members and their spouses (assuming like-mindedness) would not necessarily work to the benefit of DND. 

If all CF members changed their riding to that of their residence, then how many ridings would possibly be dominated, or merely swayed by those perceived centres of mass?  And most of those ridings not likely by enough to really be a decisive influence.

You might presume that one federal party would be notably more pro-military.  OK, so all the military-vote dominated ridings swing that way and those 10 or so seats are locked in.

Consider these scenarios:

What if that party “we” all vote for winds up with a majority anyway,? The CF vote may not have really affected the overall outcome (or such credit may not be offered in any case), so any general election promises still have to be spread out across the country. 

Or what if the party “we” vote for forms the loyal opposition?  Could DND expect strong support from the party that forms the government if not a single major base was in one of their ridings?  Do we want our future to ride primarily on the skills of the defence critic?

Lastly, what if a minority third party that holds nothing more than those few seats in the House sweeps the military ridings? Who really represents us in the House then?

Trying to rally the serving military vote, which is possibly 60K members and (perhaps) 40K spouses, is a drop in the bucket against 20 million potential voters (about 60% of whom show up).  While the effects may not be statistically measurable at all, the optics of just trying to rally that vote, or the possible behaviour of parties trying to attract that vote without expecting to be in a position to deliver, could cause more harm than good.


Election stats - http://www.elections.ca/loi/com2001/comp2001_overview/app01_e.shtml

 

[armyguy62]

I strongly disagree. Although I do not have the intelligence or ability with the english language to carry my argument, here it is.....
All I am saying is that we, serving and retired members of the CF have a right  to voice our opinion in the manner in which we feel it will do the most good. I joined the service in Moncton, NB, but was voting in Shediac, NB.  How many people in Shediac care about Defence matters?? Very few I expect, given all the other issues they have to be concerned about.

My point was that there a number of CF bases that could raise concern for Federal parties. I am NOT proposing a union, just that members decide to vote where they reside. I think that political parties would suddenly decide that 12 or 15 ridings across the country that MIGHT vote together were worth a little attention. If I am wrong, are we any further behind than we are now??

 

[Michael OLeary]

Keep in mind we're only talking about the 60,000 (ish) Regular Force members.  Reserve Force members and spouses already vote where they live and, if there's a pro-military concensus, they're already voting that way.

Now, how many electoral districts might we be concerned with?  This page shows DND Infrastructure in these ridings:

Province	Location	Electoral District
Alberta	Cold Lake	Lakeland
	Edmonton	Edmonton West
	Suffield	Medecine Hat
	Wainwright	Crowfoot
British Columbia	Comox	Vancouver Island North
	Esquimalt	Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca
	Nanaimo	Nanaimo - Cowichan
Manitoba	Portage la Prairie	Portage - Lisgar
	Shilo	Brandon-Souris
	Winnipeg	Charleswood-St. James -
		Assiniboia
New Brunswick	Gagetown	Fredericton
	Moncton	Moncton - Riverview - Dieppe
Newfoundland and Labrador	Gander	Gander-Grand Falls
	Goose Bay	Labrador
	St. John’s	St John’s East
Nova Scotia	Greenwood	Kings-Hants
	Halifax	Halifax
Ontario	Borden	Simcoe - Grey
	Kingston	Kingston and the Islands
	Meaford	Bruce – Grey – Owen Sound
	NDHQ	Ottawa - Vanier
	North Bay	Nipissing
	Petawawa	Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke
	Toronto	Willowdale
	Trenton	Prince Edward - Hastings
Quebec	Bagotville	Chicoutimi-Le Fjord
	Montreal	Mercier
	NDHQ	Hull - Aylmer
	Nicolet	Bas-Richelieu – Nicolet - Bécanco
	Valcartier	Charlesbourg-Jacques-Cartier
Saskatchewan	Moose Jaw	Palliser
Northwest Terrritories	Yellowknife	Western Arctic
Yukon	Whitehorse	Yukon

Now, I suppose we need only consider those base areas with large concentrations, for example Halifax, Ottawa and Edmonton.

But, in those areas, we also deal with multiple electoral districts which thin out the potential effect of collective voting.  This site shows the following districts with in or adjacent to those cities (I think I got all or most of them.):

CITY	RIDING	VOTE COUNT (2006)
Halifax	Halifax	49962
	Halifax West	44206
	Dartmouth	44959
	Sackville--Musquodoboit Valley--Eastern Shore	43152
Ottawa	Ottawa [Glengarry--Prescott--Russell]	55320
	Ottawa [Lanark--Carleton]	59460
	Ottawa [Nepean--Carleton]	71873
	Ottawa [Ottawa Centre]	66626
	Ottawa [Ottawa South]	61510
	Ottawa [Ottawa West--Nepean]	59450
	Ottawa [Ottawa--Orléans]	61988
	Ottawa [Ottawa--Vanier]	55695
	Hull	53794
	Gatineau	53743
Edmonton	Edmonton Centre	57530
	Edmonton East	50040
	Edmonton - Leduc	55784
	Edmonton - Mill Woods - Beaumont	46384
	Edmonton - St. Albert	58628
	Edmonton - Sherwood Park	54306
	Edmonton - Spruce Grove	58097
	Edmonton - Strathcona	52770
	TOTAL	1215277

Voter stats from http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/electionnight/

Now, split up the, possibly, 20,000 Reg F voters among the electoral districts in those three geographical areas.  20K voters (if you got them all out) among 1.2 million voters. That's 1.6 % of the turnout.

So, how many electoral districts would the theoretical concentrated military vote really sway?