Demystifying Electoral Reform in Dominica: Separating Emotion from Fact

Demystifying Electoral Reform in Dominica: Separating Emotion from Fact

The issues surrounding elections and electoral reforms in a country demands factual logical discussion and not emotion. But emotion will often prevail. Especially in politically polarized climates. That is to be expected. Elections have consequences on peoples real lives and livelihoods.

Here are the FACTS.

1. In over 40 years of elections there has not been ONE person cited for voter fraud in Dominica. This is with the ability to challenge voters at each polling station. More importantly the number of challenges are abysmally low. This idea being spread that the game is rigged is like the kid who always wrecked the cricket game everytime he gets bowled out because if he doesn’t win, the game cannot go on. 

2. Statistically, even with a bloated register, the amount of people voting meet the standard variance of those ELIGIBLE to vote EVERY election. This means that there is no statistical blip that would infer that there is fraud let alone widespread fraud. To simplify. Even if there are 70 people on the list, roughly 30-35 people turn up to the party. EVERYTIME.

3. The call for a single use voter ID card vs a national ID card shows how intellectually polarizing this discussion is. There is no proof anywhere that a multipurpose national ID card which has voter identification function will compromise our electoral process. I for one, do not want to add another card to my list of cards to manage. In fact it would be best if the national id card and voter ID card also could have the social security function encoded into it as well as serve as a health ID card for clinics. Less should be more. A single use voter ID card will actually serve to again put a limitation on peoples ability to vote if it is the sole identification authorised for voting. That has been a stated strategy in many countries, with the target being low income and minority voters who are statistically more likely to lose their voter ID cards and not go back to have them re-issued.

Here is my opinion.

1. My mother worked all her working life in Dominica (close to 40 years). She now resides overseas. I see people who have barely cut their teeth paying taxes or being on this earth working in Dominica making the case that she (and others like her) should be disqualified from voting whilst they take precedence in voting because they are present in Dominica.  That is classic disenfranchisement when now nearly every major democracy is trying to find ways to widen and not narrow the voting.  The “what have you done for me lately” premise behind it is also fundamentally wrong. She earned the right to vote and was legally registered and remains within the bounds of eligibility. Many on island voters actually barely have earned that right if ‘tenure of working’ counts. Or is it breathing Dominican air whilst being legally registered ?. And if you want to ‘quantify’ that right, then you are dangerously lurching into class warfare and the previously held notion that voting rights should be linked to property ownership and wealth.

2. The list being clean is a must but it also cannot be seen simply as a function of the electoral commission. Political parties have to do their work and citizens must go through the process. The process is deliberately difficult because it SHOULD be difficult for people to be removed from the right to vote. Its that fundamental a right. However it should be digitally enabled so that the very same overseas Dominicans can easier rectify their status.

3. If the function for the so called chattering classes and political parties of the reform process is to “LIMIT’ who can vote in order to guarantee an election win then there will be a massive problem. The people you are limiting are most definitely the poorer and the elderly. They do not belong to any one political movement and the precedent that is being attempted could backfire spectacularly. This Dominican attempt at MAGA doesn’t have a glorious past to point to for those very same people.

The idea that you can restrict voting rights, stop Dominicans coming down to vote except if they have the funds to pay for their own ticket, and keep a glorious set of patriots who live in Dominica as the only decision makers of the democracy seems very logical until you remember that both Eunica Victor and Thompson Fontaine contested an election (LEGALLY AS THEY COULD) as non resident in Dominica and both promptly left the island after losing.  Now the approach has changed but had they won, they would have been part of a legally constituted Government and all would be well. The cricket game would be fine. Now, it was never good and it needs to be wrecked. 

The Government and Labour Party cannot also treat this as business as usual. One day they will again be opposition and the process being fairer and also easier to navigate should be a primary function of this process. Therefore even if the electoral system is WORKING, improving it has a benefit beyond the current tenure. It is a difficult thing to do because if you are winning, change seems counterproductive but it is actually beneficial to voters that the system is future proofed. 

We need a better lens to examine the good and bad of what has largely been a working electoral process.