Toronto's Next Mayor

I find politics fascinating.  I remember watching the 1976 Presidential debates between Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.  Since I was merely 6 years old my memories are scant.  From the 1980 election onwards, my interest level grew and my memories remain vivid.

Canadian politics has produced fewer larger than life figures than our neighbours to the south.  In part that may simply be a result of the fact that we don't tend to mythologize our leaders as Americans do.  We don't have a Mount Rushmore.  A Canadian Prime Minister rarely uses Teddy Roosevelt's "Bully Pulpit" to the extent American Presidents do.  Ronald Reagan often went on the airwaves to ask the citizens to call their Congressman if he wasn't getting his priorities through. A Prime Minister has no need to engage in such banal pursuits.  The Right Honourable one can simply order his caucus to vote as he pleases.....no need to involve the citizens.

It is a little known fact that the person in Canada who has the largest direct voter mandate is in fact the Mayor of Toronto.  The Prime Minister is merely a Member of Parliament representing one riding while the Mayor of Toronto is directly voted in by citizens of 22 Federal ridings.  It is also not very well known that from a Constitutional standpoint, there is no such thing as a municipal level of Government.  The City of Toronto is incorporated under the laws of the Province of Ontario.

Leaving small technicalities like the Constitution aside, it is a fact that more people vote directly for the Mayor of Toronto than any other office in the land.  It is the current Mayor's race that has me more baffled and amused than any other recent election.

Councillor Rob Ford is the clear front runner.  He is 11 points ahead of former Deputy Premier of Ontario George Smitherman....according to a poll released today.  The mind boggles.

Now it must be said that the amalgamated mega city of Toronto has not been around very long.  Toronto has had but two mayors.  The first was Mel Lastman who made Toronto a laughing stock by calling in the army after a bad snowstorm and telling a reporter that he didn't want to go to Africa because he hates snakes and might end up in a boiling pot of water with natives dancing around.  (If Lastman had spent any time in some of Toronto's parks, he might have seen snakes nearer to home).


After two terms of Mel Lastman's buffoonery (the fine citizens of Toronto re-elected him with 80% of the vote for a second term), the people turned to an American born, British raised Harvard graduate named David Miller.  Mayor Miller was a very smart man whose standing as mayor was torpedoed after engaging the unions in a long garbage strike only to give in at the end.  People understandably asked what the point of forcing the strike was when he just ended up backtracking anyway.



So now along comes Rob Ford with a record as a right winger in a left wing city.  He had a DUI conviction which he was apparently not very forthcoming about.  He allegedly had to stop coaching high school football after roughing up a player.  He has stated that Toronto should not welcome any more immigrants.  He has said that AIDS is preventable as long you don't do drugs and aren't gay.

Despite all of his bluster and revelations about his past, he continues to lead the field.  I can't explain it.

Perhaps the people are tired of charming politicians who hide behind a facade.  Perhaps they like the fact that a buffoonish Rob Ford is more of an average citizen than some other candidates.  Perhaps they feel that he is so bad that he can't possibly be hiding something worse (nowhere to go but up?).

I don't really know how Rob Ford can be the frontrunner in this race.  I am no longer a Toronto resident and as such I can't vote.  If I could, I really don't know who amongst this sad lot I would vote for.  Perhaps therein lies the answer?  Perhaps a paucity of good candidates means that the people are choosing between various degrees of bad.  How sad that the race for the largest direct voter mandate in Canada might be won by default.

Lottery Fever

The Toronto Star reports that the government of Ontario is considering legalized online gambling.

http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/844961--ontario-set-to-bet-on-legalized-online-gambling?bn=1

Ontario would be joining a trend towards expansion of government run gambling.  The government approach to many vices seems to follow a trend of initial prohibition followed by monopolization.  It is true of gambling and in certain places (Ontario) it is true of the distribution of alcohol.   One wonders if they will follow that approach to marijuana and prostitution if they should ever be made fully legal?

The arguments in favour of increased gambling rely mainly upon the fact that it is very lucrative for governments around the world.  Additionally, the age of the internet means that a jurisdiction that practices prohibition still sees their citizens gambling online through internet sites that are domiciled in more permissive jursidictions.

I did a google search on the demographics of lottery players.  I found a plethora of studies that found that lottery players tended to be less educated and have less disposable income.  It naturally follows (and several studies confirmed) that those who were of an ethnic group who were economically disadvantaged were also more likely to buy lottery tickets and to spend more.

This makes sense since lotteries offer hope.  It is natural that those who are poor and/or lacking in hope would grasp at a straw offering that hope.  I do see the good that comes from that.  It may be too much to lecture the poor that they should just save the $5 that they spend on lotteries weekly and put it into a savings account.  That kind of sensible advice is better received by those who don't need it as much.

Still I cannot help but feel that a lottery is an insidious form of taxation.  The profits flow to the government from the people.  No tangible product is given in exchange for the cost of the lottery ticket.....it is strictly the possibility of a win that is being sold.  A losing ticket (which just very slightly outnumber the winning tickets) leaves the holder of that ticket without hope and without $5.  Government run gambling operations appeal mostly to those who are poor, desperate or stupid.  I recognize that there are some who spend a few dollars just to have some fun, however that is not where the bulk of the revenue comes from.

It is an insidious tax because it is regressive in its application.  It disproportionately affects those who can afford it the least.  It is particularly insidious because it is a form of taxation that generates less anger.  There were protests in the streets when the GST was introduced and more when the HST came in.  Both of these were measures that were more efficient and progressive in their application than a lottery.  Obviously income taxes are also unpopular and more progressive in application.  Yet lotteries are often greeted with cheers and long lineups.

I know that other jurisdictions are becoming more permissive.  However, this is a moral issue.  If gambling is such a vice that it ought to be banned, then the government shouldn't be running it as a monopoly. It is harmful and dumb.  Simply because other places exploit the poor and hopeless doesn't mean that we should act like lemmings and do the same thing.  By that rationale we should legalize a host of more obviously offensive activities such that dollars aren't flowing to some far away places where anything goes.

Say no to more gambling.