I'm going to bang that drum again - the same drum I've been banging on during every major election for years. And I'm going to keep banging on it until someone listens - and hears.
There's something missing from the bal-lots that are presented to us at the polling booths during federal and provincial elections.
Actually, it's missing from civic election ballots, too, when we're choosing school trustees and mayors and councillors, but it's usually not as critical, because of the wider variety of choices we usually have.
There's a choice we're all denied, and it's to the detriment of the whole democratic process.
We need one more box that we can check off (technically, in Canada, we are supposed to use check marks, not Xes to indicate our choices - but the rules accept any "obvious intention").
That extra box belongs at the bottom of the list of candidates.
And it should read: "None of the Above." We need to be able to give voice to our dissent - when it is warranted - without spoiling our ballots, which is technically illegal and logically foolish.
Even if they don't throw you in jail (I haven't heard of it ever actually happening) for spoiling your ballot when you really feel you should have the choice to vote for "None of the Above," it's a completely useless, sense-less gesture.
If you have even ever bothered to check the "Spoiled Ballots" column in a final bal-lot tally, you probably thought exactly what everyone else does: "It's amazing how many people don't even have enough intelligence to mark a ballot properly."
Be honest. No one thinks, "Wow. Those people were probably disenchanted with the choices available to them and spoiled their ballots purposely to lodge their protest."
And if you exercise the only other realistic alternative - stay home - you're just another one of those apathetic slobs who can't be bothered to make the effort to study your choices and make a valuable decision.
Either way, you don't count. You're either stupid or lazy, or both.
But if you could put your check mark in a box beside the words, "None of the Above," there would be no mistaking your intentions.
You considered the options open to you. You thought about the choices available. You weighed all the qualifications and experience offered by all the candidates.
And you decided to take your ballot into a polling booth, picked up the pencil provided, and registered the preference to which you rationally arrived.
You did not give way to a default position - you actively chose "None of the Above."
No one can dispute it. No one can deny or misconstrue your intent (or your discontent).
"None of the Above" could be an important way for a lot of people - particularly in this election - to actively participate in the democratic process.
You don't like one party and never have? You don't have to hold your nose to vote for another candidate that has no appeal for you.
You can't vote for your party's candidate because you can't stand the leader? Or vice versa?
"None of the Above" can't win an election - but it sends a clear message.
If there are few votes for "None of the Above" in your riding, clearly you are in the minority. Too bad.
But if "None of the Above" is a hugely popular choice in any riding, the politicians and their parties will have to take notice.
Or someone else will recognize the opportunity for a better choice.
Bob Groeneveld is the editor for The Record's sister papers, the Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows Times and the Langley Advance.
