Questions about No-Confidence Votes - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

ratbastid · 12-18-2005, 10:04 AM

This is an "educate the ignorant American" question for anyone who actually knows something about polysci, or lives in a country where this particular expression of the will of the electorate is available.

What exactly IS a Vote of No Confidence? How is it used? Why is it used? What are its reprecussions? What does its availability do to politics and policymaking?

Even more importantly, why doesn't the United States have it? Can anyone speak to the framer's intent on this?

I suspect that, if it were an option, America would have yanked out the ol' vaudeville hook about a month ago, and dragged Bush and Co, still frantically tap-dancing, from the stage. I'm curious about why Canada can do that and we can't. Anyone?

Hardknock · 12-18-2005, 10:35 AM

I'll tell you why. Because as of right now, there are no checks and balances in the highest levels of government. If we had both sides controlling different areas of government, then something like "no confidence" might actually be implemented with a brave senator or congressman willing to stand up and do what's right for the country. Not just what's right for the next election. But expecting anything of that nature to come to light with a republican congress apparently in the back pocket of this corrupt administration, (they won't do a damn thing about this spying scandal either. They'll spin it like they always do or they'll blame Clinton for having to have started the program in the first place and the 30-40% of the kool-aid drinkers will support Bush no matter what.) is ludicrous.

Oh, and people in other countries seem to give a shit about their government fucking them over again and again so they actually hold them accountable. Unlike us ignorant, short attention span, want it right now Americans.

alpha phi · 12-18-2005, 11:04 AM

The first Vote of No Confidence lays within the legislature
.....unfortunately useless when congress is complisit

The second Vote of No Confidence lay within the elections
.....unfortunately useless when the machines are rigged,
and we the people only have the choice of
"Our guy" D, and "Our guy" R

The third Vote of No Confidence lays within the second ammendment
.....unfortunately that has been so weakened
what good are civilan arms against a stealth bomber?
not to mention the painful lessons learned by the civil war

I've read the Constitutionseveral times over, and see no other options

Charlatan · 12-18-2005, 11:07 AM

Non-confidence vote typically only occur when there is a minority government in power. To understand how power is held in Canada you need to understand the we run a Parlimentary style of government in Canada.

The house of commons is filled with members of parliament elected by the people of Canada. The country is divided into ridings (district) and each province has a different number ridings based on population (this is why Ontario and Quebec are said to decide an election... they have the bulk of the population and therefore the bulk of the seats available come from these provinces).

Each political party (there are currently 11 registered political parties of which only 4 or 5 are relevant) runs candidates and after the election, the party with the most members of parliament (MPs) elected is asked by the Govenor General to form the government. The government is then formed. The ruling party's leader becomes the Prime Minister and appoints a cabinet made up of elected MPs from their party. The Cabinet and the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) is where the real power resides.

The party with the second highest number of seats forms the official opposition. As the official opposition you get some perks in terms of spending powers and office space. The most important perk is the ability to be first to ask questions during question period (this is the time when the House sits that the opposition gets to pose questions to the government about what they are doing - it can be quite lively).

The other opposition parties also get to ask questions but they are not given the priority of the official opposition.

In the case where the ruling party has more seats than the combined number of opposition seat there is a what is called a Majority Government. When this happens the government is one of the most powerful in the western world. They can pass laws, approve budgets, etc. as they like. They will get their feet held to the fire by the opposition if the laws are bad and eventually they will have to face the electorate (by the way, one of the powers of the government is deciding when to call the election - once in power they can call an election anytime as long as it occurs before 5 years).

When the opposition powers hold more seats than the government (i.e. the government party has the most number of seats but less than the combined number of seats held by the other parties) this is called a Minority Government. In this case, the government is in a much weaker position. The proceedures of the House are the same except there is always the possibility that the Government could lose the confidence of the house.

A loss of confidence occurs when a certain type of vote in the house, a confidence vote (which is typically around budgetary issues and the like - or the unique case of this last government where they fell on a specific vote to determin if the House had confidence in the government) is held and the opposition party vote the government's motion down (remember they out number the government). Not all motions are confidence issues, some procedural votes are excluded and will not bring the government down if the vote doesn't pass.

Ultimately, even a Majority could be brought down by a vote of non-confidence BUT that would require their own member to vote against their own party in significant enough numbers to defeat the motion brought forth by the government. This could... but never does happen.

Is this as clear as mud or does it make sense?

Charlatan · 12-18-2005, 11:11 AM

The other issue is that, as a Republic, you elect your head of state and he is seperate from the legislative branch of your government.

In Canada, the Head of State is really the Queen of England and is represented in Canada by the position of the Govenor General. This position is appointed by the PMO.

The Cabinet is the Executive Branch of our government. While they have power and authority above the average MP, they are still, when it comes down to it, just MPs. They are elected officials who must answer to their constiuents at the next election. They are also to subject to Question Period just as anyone in the Government including the Prime Minister.

Elphaba · 12-18-2005, 11:18 AM

The Canadian Elections topic has some good links for their southern neighbors. I lurk there alot.

amonkie · 12-18-2005, 11:35 AM

That made a lot of sense to me, and like Elphaba I've been lurking in the Canada Elections thread. Thanks for the Summary, Charlatan - this also highlights the main points of some info you've already given me

12-18-2005, 10:04 AM	#1 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Questions about No-Confidence Votes This is an "educate the ignorant American" question for anyone who actually knows something about polysci, or lives in a country where this particular expression of the will of the electorate is available. What exactly IS a Vote of No Confidence? How is it used? Why is it used? What are its reprecussions? What does its availability do to politics and policymaking? Even more importantly, why doesn't the United States have it? Can anyone speak to the framer's intent on this? I suspect that, if it were an option, America would have yanked out the ol' vaudeville hook about a month ago, and dragged Bush and Co, still frantically tap-dancing, from the stage. I'm curious about why Canada can do that and we can't. Anyone?

12-18-2005, 11:04 AM	#3 (permalink)
alpha phi seeker Location: home	The first Vote of No Confidence lays within the legislature .....unfortunately useless when congress is complisit The second Vote of No Confidence lay within the elections .....unfortunately useless when the machines are rigged, and we the people only have the choice of "Our guy" D, and "Our guy" R The third Vote of No Confidence lays within the second ammendment .....unfortunately that has been so weakened what good are civilan arms against a stealth bomber? not to mention the painful lessons learned by the civil war I've read the Constitutionseveral times over, and see no other options __________________ All ideas in this communication are sole property of the voices in my head. (C) 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 "The Voices" (TM). All rights reserved.

12-18-2005, 11:07 AM	#4 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	Non-confidence vote typically only occur when there is a minority government in power. To understand how power is held in Canada you need to understand the we run a Parlimentary style of government in Canada. The house of commons is filled with members of parliament elected by the people of Canada. The country is divided into ridings (district) and each province has a different number ridings based on population (this is why Ontario and Quebec are said to decide an election... they have the bulk of the population and therefore the bulk of the seats available come from these provinces). Each political party (there are currently 11 registered political parties of which only 4 or 5 are relevant) runs candidates and after the election, the party with the most members of parliament (MPs) elected is asked by the Govenor General to form the government. The government is then formed. The ruling party's leader becomes the Prime Minister and appoints a cabinet made up of elected MPs from their party. The Cabinet and the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) is where the real power resides. The party with the second highest number of seats forms the official opposition. As the official opposition you get some perks in terms of spending powers and office space. The most important perk is the ability to be first to ask questions during question period (this is the time when the House sits that the opposition gets to pose questions to the government about what they are doing - it can be quite lively). The other opposition parties also get to ask questions but they are not given the priority of the official opposition. In the case where the ruling party has more seats than the combined number of opposition seat there is a what is called a Majority Government. When this happens the government is one of the most powerful in the western world. They can pass laws, approve budgets, etc. as they like. They will get their feet held to the fire by the opposition if the laws are bad and eventually they will have to face the electorate (by the way, one of the powers of the government is deciding when to call the election - once in power they can call an election anytime as long as it occurs before 5 years). When the opposition powers hold more seats than the government (i.e. the government party has the most number of seats but less than the combined number of seats held by the other parties) this is called a Minority Government. In this case, the government is in a much weaker position. The proceedures of the House are the same except there is always the possibility that the Government could lose the confidence of the house. A loss of confidence occurs when a certain type of vote in the house, a confidence vote (which is typically around budgetary issues and the like - or the unique case of this last government where they fell on a specific vote to determin if the House had confidence in the government) is held and the opposition party vote the government's motion down (remember they out number the government). Not all motions are confidence issues, some procedural votes are excluded and will not bring the government down if the vote doesn't pass. Ultimately, even a Majority could be brought down by a vote of non-confidence BUT that would require their own member to vote against their own party in significant enough numbers to defeat the motion brought forth by the government. This could... but never does happen. Is this as clear as mud or does it make sense? __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

12-18-2005, 11:11 AM	#5 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	The other issue is that, as a Republic, you elect your head of state and he is seperate from the legislative branch of your government. In Canada, the Head of State is really the Queen of England and is represented in Canada by the position of the Govenor General. This position is appointed by the PMO. The Cabinet is the Executive Branch of our government. While they have power and authority above the average MP, they are still, when it comes down to it, just MPs. They are elected officials who must answer to their constiuents at the next election. They are also to subject to Question Period just as anyone in the Government including the Prime Minister. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

12-18-2005, 11:35 AM	#7 (permalink)
amonkie Drifting Administrator Location: Windy City	That made a lot of sense to me, and like Elphaba I've been lurking in the Canada Elections thread. Thanks for the Summary, Charlatan - this also highlights the main points of some info you've already given me __________________ Calling from deep in the heart, from where the eyes can't see and the ears can't hear, from where the mountain trails end and only love can go... ~~~ Three Rivers Hare Krishna

12-18-2005, 10:35 AM	#2 (permalink)
Hardknock Republican slayer Location: WA	I'll tell you why. Because as of right now, there are no checks and balances in the highest levels of government. If we had both sides controlling different areas of government, then something like "no confidence" might actually be implemented with a brave senator or congressman willing to stand up and do what's right for the country. Not just what's right for the next election. But expecting anything of that nature to come to light with a republican congress apparently in the back pocket of this corrupt administration, (they won't do a damn thing about this spying scandal either. They'll spin it like they always do or they'll blame Clinton for having to have started the program in the first place and the 30-40% of the kool-aid drinkers will support Bush no matter what.) is ludicrous. Oh, and people in other countries seem to give a shit about their government fucking them over again and again so they actually hold them accountable. Unlike us ignorant, short attention span, want it right now Americans.

12-18-2005, 11:18 AM	#6 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	The Canadian Elections topic has some good links for their southern neighbors. I lurk there alot.