Fair Elections Act

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by mustache ride

What happens currently when you show up without ID? I think they have always asked me for my DL. So if just show up with nothing I'm still good to go?

Option 3: Take an oath and have an elector who knows you vouch for you (both of you will be required to make a sworn statement). This person must have authorized identification and their name must appear on the list of electors in the same polling division as you. This person can only vouch for one person and the person who is vouched for cannot vouch for another elector.

[mustache ride]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Option 3: Take an oath and have an elector who knows you vouch for you (both of you will be required to make a sworn statement). This person must have authorized identification and their name must appear on the list of electors in the same polling division as you. This person can only vouch for one person and the person who is vouched for cannot vouch for another elector.

I'm new to this town. I don't know anyone. Can i still vote?
Honestly what now? Do they turn me away currently if i fail to meet one of the qualifications that you posted?

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by mustache ride

I'm new to this town. I don't know anyone. Can i still vote?
Honestly what now? Do they turn me away currently if i fail to meet one of the qualifications that you posted?

If you fail to meet any of the criteria then according to the rules they should send you away without voting.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by mustache ride

I'm new to this town. I don't know anyone. Can i still vote?
Honestly what now? Do they turn me away currently if i fail to meet one of the qualifications that you posted?

Can you give me an example of how someone would fall through those cracks? I'm trying to come up with an example but can't think of one.

If you can, I may be able to better answer your question.

[mustache ride]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Can you give me an example of how someone would fall through those cracks? I'm trying to come up with an example but can't think of one.

If you can, I may be able to better answer your question.

The quotes you posted get this far without needing a reason. The lack of a voting friend from the same district willing to swear i am who i say i am doesn't seem that like much more of a stretch. I am more just curious about where my guaranteed right to vote from the charter ends?

[Mr.Coffee]

Whenever there is a "political" type of thread on this site, there is an inordinate amount of smarmy, passive aggressive ######yness to opposite views. It's sometimes tough to wade through all the condescension without ending up despising everyone commenting.

Why can't an opinion be given without that crap?

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by mustache ride

The quotes you posted get this far without needing a reason. The lack of a voting friend from the same district willing to swear i am who i say i am doesn't seem that like much more of a stretch. I am more just curious about where my guaranteed right to vote from the charter ends?

Without reading any case law on it, or any actual research I would say that if you cannot provide the ID listed in options 1 or 2 then you would need someone that meets the requirements of option 3 to vouch for you.

If you can't do any of those, then the denial of your right to vote would be justified by section 1.

If you don't have a drivers license (or provincial ID) nor any of the IDs or documents listed in option 2, and don't know anyone who is a registered voter that can vouch for you, I don't know what more can be done.

Your right doesn't extend to walking in, picking up a ballot and walking out. It has to have reasonable limits.

If a sworn statement is upheld in a court of law, it should be enough for a voter verification.

If somehow you live somewhere that you don't know anyone else of voting age, you work in a vaccum, have no ID, don't own your residence not pay rent, and have no contact with soup kitchens, shelters, etc. you recieve no government benefits, have no bills, no insurance, no electricity etc.

Then I guess you can't vote.

I just can't fathom how anyone would meet those criteria, which is why I asked for an example for clarification.

[Tinordi]

From one staunch conservative Andrew Coyne to another, Don Martin:

So as the weeks pass since Minister of State Pierre Poilievre rolled out his bill, the backlash has grown from a sputter to a howl and gone from national to global.

"So what?" you may well say. Afghan detainee documents, Senate scandals and the death of the long-form census were all supposed to put this government on life support and didn’t. But this bill is particularly squeamish. As a change which affects all parties equally, reaching out for consultation if not consensus is essential. Yet all amendments have been rejected, debate has been limited and all dissent dissed as wilful ignorance. The groin kicker came yesterday when the author of an electoral reform report appeared before MPs to attack the government’s use of his findings. Harry Neufeld accused Minister Poilievre of declining to consult with him before selectively using quotes out of context to justify a bill customized for partisan gain.

In other words, he accused the minister of tainting evidence to craft laws to tilt future elections in the Conservative’s favor.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/ctv-news-chann...#ixzz2xObv6nny

Eager to hear how the Liberals or NDP would be worse though. Bring out your dead...

[RougeUnderoos]

Okay, so now that they have the mythical voting fraud business covered...

What about this other stuff with Elections Canada? I've read that they won't be allowed to encourage people to vote anymore. Is that true? If so, does anyone know what the rationale there is?

Another aspect I read about is that campaign spending limits would no longer include the money spent on getting previous (in the last five year) donators to re-up.

That one seems a little sneaky to me. Sneaky in the "Conservatives obviously benefit from this most" kind of way. That seems like it would make it kind of impossible to start another party then. It sounds anti-democratic to me, but again, I'm sure supporters of the bill have plenty of good reasons.

[19Yzerman19]

All that need be said is this. If there's really something so offensive in this legislation that would in fact disenfranchise a not-insignificant group of potential voters or otherwise compromise the integrity of Canadian elections in some meaningful way, it will be struck down by the Courts. I have total faith in that.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by 19Yzerman19

All that need be said is this. If there's really something so offensive in this legislation that would in fact disenfranchise a not-insignificant group of potential voters or otherwise compromise the integrity of Canadian elections in some meaningful way, it will be struck down by the Courts. I have total faith in that.

Ya except for the fact that it will take years to wind its way through the courts and the election will be over by then.

[edslunch]

Anybody else hate the Orwellian names they give their bills? Like elections were somehow unfair before?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Ya except for the fact that it will take years to wind its way through the courts and the election will be over by then.

And that it is dishonest and contemptuous and the electorate shouldn't stand for it.

There are scummy political things and then there are things like this.

[Makarov]

Harper seems to have become everything that he once said that he stood against.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Okay, so now that they have the mythical voting fraud business covered...

What about this other stuff with Elections Canada? I've read that they won't be allowed to encourage people to vote anymore. Is that true? If so, does anyone know what the rationale there is?

Another aspect I read about is that campaign spending limits would no longer include the money spent on getting previous (in the last five year) donators to re-up.

That one seems a little sneaky to me. Sneaky in the "Conservatives obviously benefit from this most" kind of way. That seems like it would make it kind of impossible to start another party then. It sounds anti-democratic to me, but again, I'm sure supporters of the bill have plenty of good reasons.

I like the no more encouraging people to vote campaigns. I think the rational is that they can appear partisan. Young people tend to vote further left then old people so get out the youth vote money is essentially being spent to move the electorate left. If a voter encouragement campaign gave taxi vouchers to old people to get them to polling stations that would move the electorate right. The type of campaign can target voters who are more likely to vlte for specific parties therefore shouldnt be done by elections canada.

The other reason I like it is that if ou need encouragement to vote you arent likely to put effort into it and therefore your vote is less educated. I would perfer more educated people vote even if they disagree with me. Because if the electorate is engaged we will get better policy than if the electorate votes based on attack ads.

One thing with the bill is elections Canada will still be able to advertise how to vote. The when and where but not target specific groups to encourage them to vote.

Even though I like the idea it still has conservative slime on it because its initial effect will likely reduce youth turnout which is left leaning.

[evman150]

And yet there are still hundreds of thousands of Albertans who will vote for them no matter what.

In this way, Albertans are a lot like young-Earth creationists. Show them all the evidence in the world, but there is zero chance of changing their minds.

I come from a city that's been represented by four political parties in the past two elections. That's healthy democracy in action. One political party, in (almost) every riding, for a half dozen elections? Hmmm...

As I've said before, Alberta is the deep south of Canada, and their continual support of this party and government is the shame of the nation.

I'm a Flames fan to the core, but I couldn't be prouder of being British Columbian.

[mustache ride]

Originally Posted by evman150

As I've said before, Alberta is the deep south of Canada, and their continual support of this party and government is the shame of the nation.

I'm a Flames fan to the core, but I couldn't be prouder of being British Columbian.

Amazing!

[evman150]

Originally Posted by mustache ride

Amazing!

What a shocker of a rebuttal coming from the person who's trying to dig to China to find a person who defrauds the current voting process!

[GGG]

Originally Posted by evman150

And yet there are still hundreds of thousands of Albertans who will vote for them no matter what.

In this way, Albertans are a lot like young-Earth creationists. Show them all the evidence in the world, but there is zero chance of changing their minds.

I come from a city that's been represented by four political parties in the past two elections. That's healthy democracy in action. One political party, in (almost) every riding, for a half dozen elections? Hmmm...

As I've said before, Alberta is the deep south of Canada, and their continual support of this party and government is the shame of the nation.

I'm a Flames fan to the core, but I couldn't be prouder of being British Columbian.

I dont really think this is a fair way to view alberta. If you look at how alberta has voted they have voted against Trudeau who legitamately screwd them, voted for a western representive party, then voted for two western leaders of a national party.

This seems like voting in self interest to me. The rest of your post is pure ignorance. Just look at who Calgary elected as mayor and call us rednecks. Hell we have the least fiscally conservative provincial government in Canada right now which was elected with union backing. We have the 3rd largest immigrant population

So take your prejudice and scheudenfraude elsewhere and enjoy your faux bc nationalism.

[mustache ride]

Originally Posted by evman150

What a shocker of a rebuttal coming from the person who's trying to dig to China to find a person who defrauds the current voting process!

I was more interested in where my current rights ended under the what we currently have now. But swing it whatever way you need friend! Thanks for being such a fine representative of your province. haha