A vow at a wedding is better than a promise on the campaign trail


Snowdrops are symbols of the promise that winter will end and spring will begin.
On the Canadian prairie, every year, we desperately want to believe the promise of this tiny flower.

The news is full of the US election. So many words, so much hot air, so many calls for Kamala Harris to get specific on policy. But I am fine with her focus on being “a joyful warrior for the people”, on generating “an opportunity economy”, and on her commitment to “not going back”.

I am fine with this so-called soft approach, because I don’t put much stock in hard promises made on the campaign trail.

A lot can happen between a promise made on the trail and that promise becoming law in office — wars can break out, pandemics can arise, economics can take a dive. And, regardless of any chaos that might arise, we expect our leaders to pivot on their platform and to keep our lives and our livelihoods on track. So, promises will, inevitably, get broken, though not always with good reason.

Here in Canada, many of us were disappointed when Justin Trudeau went back on his promise of electoral reform, made during the 2015 election. On the campaign trail, he promised that that election would be the last one where “first past the post” would win and he promised to introduce electoral reform.

It was a much wanted and greatly anticipated campaign promise. But he broke it within less than two years of being in office. As Canada looks to a federal election no later than fall of 2025, we will be, once again, electing a government with the “first past the post” method. Bah! So much for promises made on the campaign trail.

My solution is that politicians quit with the promises and start making wedding-like vows to us voters instead.

When two people marry, they make vows to each other. More or less, those vows boil down to having and holding each other — for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health — until one of them dies. These are general statements of values and commitments; these are not promises of specific behaviours or programs they can expect of each other. Because we know that personal relationships go through ups and downs over the years, and we know that a strong foundation of trust and respect is the best way for any two partners to see each other through whatever life puts on their path.

When I married Val on August 31, 2013, my vow to her was in the form of the commitment “to nourish our belief in each other with love and tenderness and encouragement — every day.” Mostly, I think, I have lived up to that vow that speaks to a mindset and a practice of putting our partnership at the centre of my life. I could no more have promised to never snore (I do, with a vengeance sometimes, I’m told) than I could have to learn to appreciate being teased (I really hate being teased, a failing I blame on my being a middle child). And Val didn’t expect me to.

Specific promises have their place. A wedding is not one of them, and I’m not sure a campaign trail is either. I married a woman who vowed to show up for me with her best self possible, every day of our life together, and I’ll vote for the politician who shows me their values on the campaign trail and vows to live up to them in every decision they make during their time in office.

In the US election, for me, the choice is clear. (Too bad I can't vote.)

....................................................................................................................

To receive my weekly blogpost in your inbox, email fiveyearsawriter at gmail dot comSimply put SUBSCRIBE in the subject line. 

Land acknowledgement: I respectfully recognize that I live on the original lands of Anishinaabe, Cree, Oji-Cree, Dakota and Dene peoples, and on the homeland of the Métis Nation.

Photo of snowdrop by Aaron Burden on Unsplash

Comments

  1. Very thoughtful post this morning.
    Love the way you sort out wedding vows as opposed to election year political promises, most of which fall by the wayside. In the middle of lots of that presently.

    Not sure what you’re objection to winner takes all at the ballot box tho. Here we’ve had a rash of the also ran claiming victory even tho He lost in the popular vote. Damn the electoral college, an antiquated institution that outlived its purpose at lest a hundred years ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ann: Different methods give different (better) representation of the actual votes cast across the country's regions --
      FIRST PAST THE POST: The person getting the most votes is elected. Note that ‘most’
      refers to a plurality, not necessarily a majority. This system is currently used in
      CANADA, the USA, the UK and many former English colonies.
      ALTERNATIVE VOTE: The voter ranks all the candidates in order of preference. If one
      candidate wins a majority, that person is elected. If there is no outright majority,
      the person with the lowest number of votes is dropped and their votes are
      redistributed to those candidates who were the second preference of the voters
      whose candidate is being dropped. If a majority is created, the candidate with the
      majority is elected. If there is still no majority, the candidate with the next lowest
      vote is dropped and their vote redistributed. This process repeats until a majority
      results. This approach is used in AUSTRALIA.
      TWO ROUNDS: Here there are two rounds of voting. If in the first round someone
      gets a majority, that person is elected. If there is no majority from the first round,
      the two top candidates compete in the second round – with the winner being
      elected. A variant of this approach is used in FRANCE would be 'representation by population'
      PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION: The number of seats awarded to a party is in
      proportion to the number of votes received by that party. The selection of the
      members of the legislature is most commonly done from the party lists put
      together by the leaders of the political party. Proportional representation is the
      most wide spread of electoral systems in terms of the number of nations using it.
      MIXED SYSTEM: The legislature is chosen by a combination of First Past the Post
      and Proportional Representation. GERMANY does this.
      Source: https://www.ourcommons.ca/content/Committee/421/ERRE/Brief/BR8535928/br-external/LavertyPatrick-e.pdf

      Delete
  2. Excellent post Amanda, thank you also for laying out, so clearly, the different election methods. I had no idea which countries used which processes. Yes, it was incredibly disappointing that Trudeau did not keep his promise on proportional representation, I am definitely holding that grudge!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated. Please be respectful.

Popular posts from this blog

Listening for the piano / Thinking about grief

Life story: I am from...where? who? what?

If pride comes before a fall, what comes after disappointment?