tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/federal-election-2016-26032/articlesFederal election 2016 – The Conversation2023-03-16T12:34:43Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1956352023-03-16T12:34:43Z2023-03-16T12:34:43ZNeighbors Ohio and Michigan are moving further apart in politics – differences in ballot access may explain why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505728/original/file-20230122-35731-uvi2qt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=22%2C7%2C4970%2C3293&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Voters cast their ballots at a polling station in Detroit during the 2022 midterm elections.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/voters-cast-their-ballots-at-a-polling-station-in-detroit-news-photo/1244697629?adppopup=true">Matthew Hatcher/LightRocket via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It may seem that the midterm elections are firmly behind us.</p>
<p>Pollsters are already measuring likely outcomes in <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2024/president/us/2024_republican_presidential_nomination-7548.html">2024 presidential matchups</a>. And announced candidates and possible contenders for the Republican presidential nomination <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/03/10/desantis-trump-iowa-biden-european-commission/">are taking trips to Iowa</a>, the party’s first nominating state.</p>
<p>But 2022 election results from two key states tell us a lot about how voting laws and issues on the ballot influence the way people vote. </p>
<p>At first glance, it’s not easy to understand why Michigan, a <a href="https://usafacts.org/articles/what-are-the-current-swing-states-and-how-have-they-changed-over-time/">left-leaning swing state</a>, and Ohio, a <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/ohio-political-transformation">Republican stronghold and former swing state</a>, had such different electoral outcomes in the midterms. Their <a href="https://data.census.gov/table?g=0400000US26,39">similar demographic makeups</a> and past similar voting patterns – such as electing Republicans statewide over several election cycles – suggest they would tend to have similar results at the ballot box. </p>
<p>As <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=T9fkYCIAAAAJ&hl=en">scholars of electoral politics</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=tEffT2gAAAAJ&hl=en">state policy</a> in Ohio, we explored recent elections in both states and found a divergence after 2016, with Michigan voting more blue and Ohio voting more red. Our analysis suggests differences in voter registration laws and ballot initiatives may explain why these two states have taken different electoral paths. This preliminary research has not yet been peer-reviewed.</p>
<p>Between 2000 and 2012, the states had similar voting results more than half the time. But they did diverge slightly. During the period, <a href="https://www.270towin.com/states/Michigan">Michigan voters picked the Democratic presidential</a> candidate in each of the four contests. Meanwhile, <a href="https://www.270towin.com/states/Ohio">in Ohio, voters went twice each for Republican</a> President George W. Bush and Democratic President Barack Obama. At the gubernatorial level, for three elections during this period – 2002, 2006 and 2010 – Michigan elected one Republican and elected and reelected one Democrat, while Ohio elected two Republicans and one Democrat.</p>
<p>In the 2016 presidential election, voters in both Michigan and Ohio chose Republican <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/michigan">candidate Donald Trump</a>. That year, there was no U.S. Senate election in Michigan, but Ohio voters returned Republican U.S. Sen. <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/portman-wins-reelection-in-ohio-230970">Rob Portman for another term</a>. And voters in both states sent <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/house">more Republicans than Democrats to the U.S. House of Representatives</a> and both houses of their state legislatures. </p>
<p>While the two states had been slowly moving apart for a couple of decades, they <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/president">converged in the 2016 presidential election</a> for Trump. </p>
<h2>Michigan goes blue, Ohio stays red</h2>
<p>Since 2016, however, voters in the two states have followed drastically different political paths. In 2018, 2020 and 2022, Michigan voters elected Democratic <a href="https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/michigan/">candidates for governor, U.S. Senate</a> and <a href="https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/state/michigan">president</a> as well as a majority in <a href="https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2022/11/09/michigan-house-senate-democrats-election-results/69632658007/">both houses of the state legislature</a>. And they voted for ballot initiatives that <a href="https://mielections.us/election/results/2018GEN_CENR.html">legalized marijuana, reformed redistricting and legalized same-day voter registration</a>, which included straight-ticket voting, automatic voter registration, same-day voter registration and no-excuse absentee voting. They also voted to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/09/us/abortion-rights-ballot-proposals.html">modify the state constitution</a> to protect abortion and contraception rights – all policies typically supported by Democratic candidates.</p>
<p>During the same three election cycles in Ohio, residents cast their ballots for Republican candidates and policy initiatives favored by Republicans. Voters <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_2018_ballot_measures">rejected drug-related criminal justice reform</a>, approved a referendum that could <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Ohio_2022_ballot_measures">make bail more punitive</a> and affirmed that only U.S. citizens could vote in Ohio elections. <a href="https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/ohio/">Republicans actually dominated electoral politics</a> in both federal and state races, with one exception: in 2018, voters <a href="https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/ohio/">sent Democrat Sherrod Brown</a> back to the U.S. Senate.</p>
<p>Beyond that, Ohioans voted for a Republican governor, presidential candidate, all statewide executive offices, in addition to the governor, the <a href="https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2022/11/09/republicans-headed-for-sweep-of-ohio-supreme-court-elections/">three open seats on the state supreme court</a> and a <a href="https://www.bricker.com/insights-resources/publications/2022-general-election-update">super majority in the state legislature</a>. The U.S. Senate seat vacated by a Republican stayed in Republican control.</p>
<h2>It’s not demographics</h2>
<p>Analysts suggest that <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/ohio-has-taken-different-turn-ohio-no-longer-appears-be-n1247507">Ohio is no longer a swing state because it is overwhelmingly white and working-class</a>. But, as we examined the populations, we learned demographic differences were not the reason Michigan and Ohio voters diverged politically. Data from the <a href="https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/data.html">American Community Survey</a>, a demographic study from the U.S. Census Bureau, shows that these two Midwest states are remarkably similar demographically.</p>
<p>Michigan and Ohio have similar white populations, 78% and 80%, respectively; Black populations, 14% and 12%; bachelor’s degree recipients, both 18%; people over 65, both 17%; median household incomes, both $59,000 in 2020 dollars; and <a href="http://unionstats.com/">workers belonging to unions</a>, 13% and 12%. </p>
<p>But state-specific exit polls of early and 2022 Election Day <a href="https://www.cnn.com/election/2022/exit-polls/michigan/governor/0">voters in Michigan</a> and <a href="https://www.cnn.com/election/2022/exit-polls/ohio/senate/0?fbclid=IwAR2bMJXuRmSzcmSKFY1E61HrUUg-Uji9PBuMiLWxmtZJ_716x1ktdPcrAlw">Ohio show there are differences</a> in the electorate. Ohio voters were a little more likely to be male – 52% to 50% – and white, 83% to 80%, than Michigan voters.</p>
<p>Ohio voters were less likely to reside in a union household – 21% to 27% – and were much more likely to identify as Republicans, 41% to 32%. </p>
<h2>Early voter registration may play a part</h2>
<p>In 2018, Michigan approved same-day registration, <a href="https://mvic.sos.state.mi.us/Home/RegisterToVote#how">which allows voters to register on Election Day</a>, and <a href="https://www.mlive.com/news/2019/09/secretary-of-state-unveils-automatic-voter-registration.html">automatic voter registration</a>, which makes voter registration automatic with driver’s license applications and renewal for those eligible. Ohio requires voters to <a href="https://www.ohiosos.gov/elections/voters/current-voting-schedule/2022-schedule/">register nearly a month prior to Election Day</a>. </p>
<p>Registration data for Michigan shows these easier methods of registration may have corresponded with <a href="https://www.michigan.gov/sos/elections/election-results-and-data">higher voter participation</a> in the state. The increase in total votes cast in Michigan, from <a href="https://mielections.us/election/results/2016GEN_CENR.html">4.8 million in 2016</a> to <a href="https://mielections.us/election/results/2016GEN_CENR.html">5.5 million in 2020</a>, suggests the 2018 registration changes had an effect. While there may be other factors related to Michigan’s increased turnout, the changes in the state’s laws suggest same-day and automatic registration played a part.</p>
<p>What’s more, there was a higher number of <a href="https://mvic.sos.state.mi.us/VoterCount/Index">registered voters in Michigan</a> than <a href="https://www.ohiosos.gov/media-center/week-in-review-archive/2022-10-14/">in Ohio</a>, even though Ohio has 1.7 million more people than Michigan. And, according to the <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/05/06/2021-09422/estimates-of-the-voting-age-population-for-2020">Federal Register</a>, Ohio has 1.3 million more residents of voting age than Michigan. The data also indicates Ohio historically had a larger number of registered voters than Michigan until Michigan approved same-day and automatic voter registration. </p>
<p><iframe id="rHwcm" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/rHwcm/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>According to the Michigan secretary of state’s official election results, <a href="https://mielections.us/election/results/2022GEN_CENR.html">there were 4.5 million total votes</a> in the gubernatorial election, the highest office contested in 2022. Meanwhile in Ohio, the secretary of state reported <a href="https://www.ohiosos.gov/elections/election-results-and-data/2022-official-election-results/">4.2 million total official votes</a> cast for governor. </p>
<h2>Issues may affect voter participation</h2>
<p>There is some indication that when <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9113-1">social issues that people care about</a> are on the ballot, more people vote. In 2022, Michigan had a proposal that called for adding the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/09/us/abortion-rights-ballot-proposals.html">right to abortion and contraceptive use to the state constitution</a>. That year, according to data from the Michigan secretary of state’s office, the total number of voters in the state <a href="https://www.michigan.gov/sos/elections/election-results-and-data">was up by 159,060</a> from 2018. Ohio, though, had ballot issues in 2022 related to <a href="https://spectrumnews1.com/oh/columbus/news/2022/09/29/issues-1-and-2-are-on-the-november-ballot--what-they-mean">setting bail for criminal defendants and prohibiting noncitizens from voting in local elections</a>. The total number of voters in <a href="https://www.ohiosos.gov/elections/election-results-and-data/">Ohio dropped by 295,466</a> between 2018 and 2022.</p>
<p>Before candidates work to mobilize and persuade voters, campaigns try to influence the pool of potential voters, acting within the rules of their states. Changes in the registration rules in Michigan, along with social issues on the ballot and other factors, may have created a different electoral environment there than exists in Ohio, where none of these changes have taken place. This suggests the possibility that writing off Ohio as a noncompetitive state may be premature.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/195635/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Jackson is affiliated with the Bowling Green State Faculty Association (AAUP/AFT).</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dominic D. Wells does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Voters in Michigan and Ohio once voted similarly in statewide and federal elections. Now, Michigan swings blue and Ohio is red.David Jackson, Professor of Political Science, Bowling Green State UniversityDominic D. Wells, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Bowling Green State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1684402021-10-25T12:33:28Z2021-10-25T12:33:28ZStudying political science motivates college students to register and vote – new research shows<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427294/original/file-20211019-15011-iydd2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C11%2C3982%2C2550&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Students who take political science classes in college are more likely to be civically engaged. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/second-year-student-curren-mandon-right-joins-students-news-photo/1235261763?adppopup=true">Al Seib/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/research-brief-83231">Research Brief</a> is a short take about interesting academic work.</em></p>
<h2>The big idea</h2>
<p>Community college students who take political science classes are more likely to register to vote, turn out to vote and understand constitutional checks and balances. That’s according to <a href="https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X211045982">our study</a> of more than 2,000 students at nine community colleges.</p>
<p>After taking students’ prior civic engagement and other college experiences into account, we found that students who took at least one political science course were 9% more likely to register to vote than those who did not.</p>
<p>Additionally, we found that students who took at least one political science class were 8% more likely to vote. </p>
<p>Improving college student voter turnout is a national issue. After the 2008 presidential election, many states began to <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/new-voting-restrictions-america">adopt restrictive voting</a> laws that <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/688343">depressed turnout</a>, notably <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000127">among Hispanic college students in the 2016 presidential election</a>. </p>
<p>Finally, we concluded that at least one political science course helped students better understand constitutional checks and balances. Students who had taken political science were 9% more likely to understand that the Supreme Court – and not the president – determines whether laws are constitutional. They were also 17% more likely to understand how Congress can override a presidential veto. </p>
<h2>Why it matters</h2>
<p>Recent events, including two sets of impeachment proceedings against former President Donald Trump, illustrate the importance of understanding constitutional principles. Around the time of the first impeachment of Trump, <a href="https://www.goacta.org/wp-content/uploads/ee/download/ACTA-Civic-Survey-2019.pdf">almost half of adults</a> in the United States did not know impeachment proceedings originate in the House of Representatives. </p>
<p>According to data from the National Study of Learning, Voting, and Engagement, about <a href="https://idhe.tufts.edu/research/national-study-learning-voting-and-engagement-nslve/nslve-data-portal">1 in 4 students</a> – including at both two- and four-year colleges – were not registered to vote in the 2016 or 2018 elections. </p>
<p>In a high-turnout year like the 2016 presidential election, about half of college students did not vote. In a lower-turnout year such as the 2018 midterm election, about 6 in 10 students did not vote. (Data on college student voter turnout during the 2020 election is not yet available.)</p>
<p>Voter turnout matters in close elections, and college students represent sizable percentages of eligible voters across the 50 states, ranging from as low as <a href="https://idhe.tufts.edu/resources-tools/data-portal-visualizations/college-student-vote-potential-2020">3.6% in Alaska to as high as 10.2% in Utah</a>. </p>
<h2>What still isn’t known</h2>
<p>We believe it is important to emphasize that our findings were not focusing on college students who majored in political science. We also could not examine the content of their courses or their grades. Finally, we relied on self-reported data, so there is no practical way to confirm that they registered to vote or turned out to vote. However, we do know whether they correctly answered questions about constitutional checks and balances. </p>
<h2>What’s next</h2>
<p>In ongoing research, we are focusing on the ways that co-curricular experiences, such as belonging to campus organizations or holding a position of leadership in a student organization, relate to civic engagement. We hope to offer implications for ways that multiple departments on college and university campuses can take a holistic approach to supporting civic engagement. </p>
<p>This line of research is relevant for colleges and universities that have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2006.11778934">mission statements</a> that include teaching students to be civically engaged. <a href="https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312034001039">Historically</a>, American schools, colleges and universities have been expected to support civic education. We hope our findings and future research will offer information that faculty and administrators can use to develop curriculums and require courses that support civic engagement.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168440/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Taking just one political science class makes college students more likely to show up at the polls, two researchers find.Frank Fernandez, Assistant Professor of Higher Education Administration & Policy, University of FloridaMatthew J Capaldi, PhD Student & Graduate Assistant in Higher Education Administration, University of FloridaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1020322018-08-24T06:48:24Z2018-08-24T06:48:24ZWith a new prime minister nominated, the Nationals have a rare chance to assert themselves<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233429/original/file-20180824-149490-17855nn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">It is often forgotten that the Liberals cannot govern without the support of the Nationals, and this has been the case for almost 100 years.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>So, Scott Morrison, MP for The Shire, has won the leadership of the Liberal Party. One must wonder what role external factors played in his victory, including the vague threat by some National Party members that they would sit on the crossbenches had Dutton been victorious.</p>
<p>With all the focus on the various ructions in the Liberal Party, it is too often forgotten that the current government is a coalition of the Liberal Party and the National Party. The Liberals cannot govern without the support of the Nationals. This has been the case for almost 100 years, with the first coalition government being that of the Nationalists led by Stanley Bruce and the Country Party led by Earle Page.</p>
<p>The Liberals have rarely had enough seats in the House of Representatives to rule in their own right when in government and so have always governed together with their Country/National Party colleagues. This has always given the National Party considerable leverage with regard to the Coalition. This has included the capacity to veto possible Liberal Prime Ministers, as <a href="http://www.nma.gov.au/primeministers/john_mcewen">happened in 1968</a>, when then leader John McEwen said he would not countenance Bill McMahon as Prime Minister.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-hard-right-terminated-turnbull-only-to-see-scott-morrison-become-pm-102036">How the hard right terminated Turnbull, only to see Scott Morrison become PM</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It has also enabled the National Party to influence which ministerial portfolios will be allocated to them. In earlier times, the National Party leader was Treasurer in a Coalition government. McEwen changed this when he held the important portfolio of Trade and Industry from 1956 to 1971.</p>
<p>The National Party has declined in importance over the past 50 years, as the proportion of the population living in rural areas has declined, not least because of the mechanisation of Australian agriculture. Over the past 20 years, their representation in the House of Representatives has been in the range of ten to 16 seats. Over that same period, the Liberal Party has had a minimum of 50 seats and a maximum of 74.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, it’s worth noting that after <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/federal-election-2016-26032">the 2016 election</a>, the National Party has been in its strongest position in terms of the Liberals for some time. Whereas after the 2013 election, it held 15 seats to the Liberals’ 74, after 2016 it held 16 seats to the Liberals’ 60.</p>
<p>As the government holds office by the barest of majorities, this places the Nationals in a position of strength regarding the formation of a new Coalition government. While there has been no indication the leadership of the Nationals wishes to act as a King (or Queen) maker, there have been rumblings from other members of the party.</p>
<p>Prior to the leadership vote, it was reported that National MPs Darren Chester, Kevin Hogan and Damian Drum could go to the crossbench if Peter Dutton were elected leader. Both Drum and Chester are from Victoria, while Hogan holds the marginal seat of Page in northern New South Wales, which includes the hippy capital of Australia, Nimbin.</p>
<p>We will never know know how serious these reports were. They may have been no more than an updated attempt by the Nationals, unofficially, to get the Liberal leader of their choice. It may also reflect the fact rural Victoria is more “liberal” than outback New South Wales and Queensland. </p>
<p>Certainly, their defection would have created a minority government, but one wonders how it would affect their preselection. Maybe they think they could win their seats as independents.</p>
<p>The key point is the current situation places the National Party in a position of strength with regard to their Liberal colleagues. Having undergone “trial by Barnaby” they can now move on and make the most of the situation.</p>
<p>Assuming the government runs for another eight months, they have an opportunity to pursue policies that will benefit their rural constituencies, thereby aiding their chances of re-election in 2019. With the progressive Turnbull, whose interests more or less aligned with those of urban Australia, out of the way, they could well have a window of opportunity to place more focus on rural Australia.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-turnbull-government-is-all-but-finished-and-the-liberals-will-now-need-to-work-out-who-they-are-101894">The Turnbull government is all but finished, and the Liberals will now need to work out who they are</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>One thing which will be of particular interest will be the portfolios which the Nationals will seek. Could they possibly want energy, given the importance of the cost of power?</p>
<p>It’s certainly the case that the events of the past few days have weakened the authority of the Liberal Party in terms of its capacity to provide good government for the country. They’re now seen as behaving like a group of fractious and difficult school children.</p>
<p>Under these circumstances, it seems to me, the National Party is presented with an opportunity to use its role within the Coalition to exercise its influence on behalf of rural Australia. It remains to be seen the extent to which it will make the most of this opportunity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102032/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gregory Melleuish receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is a member of the Academic Advisory Board of the Menzies Research Centre.</span></em></p>The National Party has the opportunity to use its role within the Coalition to exercise its influence on behalf of rural Australia.Gregory Melleuish, Professor, School of Humanities and Social Inquiry, University of WollongongLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/754622017-05-07T19:40:15Z2017-05-07T19:40:15ZHow the politics of the budget might play out for a government in trouble<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/168023/original/file-20170505-21635-1hykoj9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">This budget, led by Scott Morrison and Malcolm Turnbull, will form part of the government's repositioning as an advocate of equal opportunity and fairness.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Given <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/newspoll">months of polls</a> that show Labor ahead and damaging internal disunity, the politics of this budget are extremely tricky for the government to manage.</p>
<p>It is not just that Tony Abbott’s sniping is causing political headaches for Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. Some of the government’s budget problems go back to the 2013 election. </p>
<p>In that campaign, Abbott suggested the budget deficit problems would be easily fixed by simply getting rid of Labor, and the government could somehow do so painlessly <a href="http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2013/09/06/no-cuts-abc-or-sbs-abbott">without cutting</a> health, education or pensions.</p>
<p>However, as then-treasurer Wayne Swan <a href="http://ministers.treasury.gov.au/DisplayDocs.aspx?doc=speeches/2012/010.htm&pageID=005&min=wms&Year=&DocType=1">had noted</a>, Australian budget deficit problems were very complex and included substantial falls in government revenue due to the global financial crisis and the end of the mining boom. They weren’t just due to government spending. </p>
<p>Opponents criticised the size of the Rudd government’s expenditure, including its economic stimulus package designed to counter the GFC. Nonetheless, <a href="http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/79983/20130830-1433/www.pm.gov.au/press-office/address-national-press-club.html">Kevin Rudd argued</a> that Australian government debt was in fact relatively small compared with many other Western countries in a post-GFC world. </p>
<p>Once he won office, Abbott had to face the difficult realities involved in reducing the deficit. The substantial 2014 budget cuts, including to areas Abbott said would be protected, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-pays-price-for-broken-promises-20140518-38hzw.html">infuriated many voters</a> and contributed to his poor polls and political demise. </p>
<p>The Abbott government’s woes went beyond the failure to fix a difficult budget situation. Other than attacking Labor, it wasn’t clear what its positive vision for the Australian economy was in terms of how to transition after the mining boom, and how to develop new jobs and new industries at a time of rapid economic and technological change.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/168027/original/file-20170505-4929-1kbvayg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/168027/original/file-20170505-4929-1kbvayg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/168027/original/file-20170505-4929-1kbvayg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/168027/original/file-20170505-4929-1kbvayg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/168027/original/file-20170505-4929-1kbvayg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/168027/original/file-20170505-4929-1kbvayg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/168027/original/file-20170505-4929-1kbvayg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Tony Abbott’s sniping continues to cause headaches for Malcolm Turnbull.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Sam Mooy</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Replacing Abbott with Turnbull was meant to provide us with such a positive economic vision. However, Turnbull’s mantra of living in innovative and “exciting times” failed to convince many voters. As one <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/federal-election-2016-coalition-mps-worried-they-could-be-gone/news-story/0d9deee3f33d7b37fc8b67f2bc805c81">anonymous Liberal MP noted</a>, it actually made some voters highly nervous about what was going to happen to their jobs. </p>
<p>Hence Turnbull turned to promising “jobs and growth” during the <a href="http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/22107/20160629-0831/www.liberal.org.au/index.html">2016 election campaign</a>.</p>
<p>However, the Coalition’s narrow win suggested many voters still weren’t convinced the government knew how to ensure job security and a good standard of living in challenging times. In particular, many voters remained unconvinced that substantial business tax cuts would drive the economic growth and improved government revenues that were promised.</p>
<p>Given current levels of <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/6202.0main+features5Nov%202016">underemployment</a>, unusually <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/2016-06-17/fact-check-is-wage-growth-lowest-on-record/7505512">low wages growth</a> and with <a href="https://theconversation.com/land-of-the-fair-go-no-more-wealth-in-australia-is-becoming-more-unequal-63327">inequality increasing</a>, they had reason to be concerned. There is also <a href="http://voxeu.org/article/tax-reforms-and-top-incomes">international research</a> suggesting that corporate tax cuts don’t have the beneficial results claimed.</p>
<p>Fast forward to the 2017 budget, and the Liberals are desperately trying to develop a more convincing economic narrative around good economic management, nation-building, and fairness. </p>
<p>Despite their attempts to blame past Labor policy and more recent Labor intransigence at passing budget cuts in the Senate, Liberal ministers are still having <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2016/s4662631.htm">trouble explaining</a> how government debt has increased from A$270 billion under Labor to some $480 billion under the Coalition. </p>
<p>Fortunately for them, Treasurer Scott Morrison <a href="http://sjm.ministers.treasury.gov.au/speech/006-2017/">now argues</a> there is “good debt” and “bad debt”. Good debt covers areas such as infrastructure that assists economic growth. Bad debt apparently covers areas such as welfare. </p>
<p>Morrison is partly belatedly accepting advice on infrastructure-funding debt from bodies such as the <a href="http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2015/062415a.htm">International Monetary Fund</a>, while <a href="http://sjm.ministers.treasury.gov.au/speech/006-2017/">trying to argue</a> that the government’s new debt policies will be very different from past Labor economic stimulus ones. </p>
<p>Needless to say, these areas of “good” and “bad” debt aren’t quite as simple to define as Morrison suggests. Furthermore, so called nation-building infrastructure spending is sometimes more electoral pork barrelling than economic necessity. Doubts have already been raised over the economic, rather than political, benefits of a second Sydney airport and inter-capital city rail links. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/168028/original/file-20170505-21608-9zyjhi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/168028/original/file-20170505-21608-9zyjhi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/168028/original/file-20170505-21608-9zyjhi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/168028/original/file-20170505-21608-9zyjhi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/168028/original/file-20170505-21608-9zyjhi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/168028/original/file-20170505-21608-9zyjhi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/168028/original/file-20170505-21608-9zyjhi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The NBN: ‘good debt’ or ‘bad debt’?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Meanwhile, Turnbull <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2016/s4661219.htm">struggled</a> to explain whether Labor’s National Broadband Network was good or bad debt in terms of building necessary infrastructure. </p>
<p>Australian businesses that are <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-01/manning-what-went-wrong-with-the-nbn/7210408">struggling</a> with Turnbull’s cheaper version, with its continuing use of <a href="https://www.copper.org/applications/telecomm/consumer/evolution.html">19th century</a> derived copper wire technology or 1990s pay-TV-derived <a href="http://www.nbnco.com.au/learn-about-the-nbn/network-technology/hybrid-fibre-coaxial-explained-hfc-3.html">hybrid fibre coaxial cable</a> technology may be wondering whether the Coalition should have discovered “good” infrastructure debt earlier and supported Labor’s more expensive <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-01/manning-what-went-wrong-with-the-nbn/7210408">fibre-optic to-the-premises</a> model. </p>
<p>After all, under <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/news/wireless--broadband/labors-47-billion-broadband-plan/2007/03/21/1174153131586.html">Rudd</a>, the NBN was meant to be the nation-building 21st century equivalent of 19th-century government infrastructural expenditure on building railways.</p>
<p>Consequently, the government faces questions about whether its economic policy positions have been consistent, particularly given past Coalition rhetoric about debts and deficits.</p>
<p>Furthermore, while Morrison apparently characterises it as bad debt, providing temporary welfare benefits for those who lose their jobs because of economic downturns or restructuring helps keep up consumption levels. This in turn means it potentially has flow-on benefits for the private sector, as well as the individuals concerned. </p>
<p>It is a central lesson of the Keynesian economics that Robert Menzies’ Liberal Party <a href="http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/downing-richard-ivan-dick-10045">embraced</a> at its foundation, but was rejected under John Howard in the 1980s. </p>
<p>Does all of this mean that Turnbull is now acknowledging a lesson of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/even-if-he-keeps-the-top-job-malcolm-turnbulls-troubles-have-only-just-begun-61425">2016 election</a>: that neoliberalism is harder to sell than it used to be? Are his <a href="https://theconversation.com/pressure-on-malcolm-turnbull-to-bend-to-conservatives-is-stronger-than-ever-68479">backdowns</a> on “small-l” liberal values now being combined with back-downs on some of his long-held free-market values? </p>
<p>That seems to be going too far at present, especially given the government’s continued belief in the “trickle-down” benefits of corporate tax cuts and attacks on welfare expenditure. </p>
<p>However, there is some nuancing taking place as Turnbull tries to throw off the image of <a href="https://theconversation.com/mr-harbourside-mansion-credlin-gives-turnbull-a-moniker-with-cut-through-59390">“Mr Harbourside Mansion”</a> who loves hobnobbing with bright young technology entrepreneurs, and instead stress he is in touch with the concerns of ordinary voters.</p>
<p>Consequently, and much to <a href="http://www.tanyaplibersek.com/transcript_radio_interview_abc_rn_breakfast_wednesday_3_may_2017">Labor’s outrage</a>, the government has now repositioned itself as an advocate of equal opportunity and fairness that supports a <a href="http://www.pm.gov.au/media/2017-05-02/press-conference-minister-education-and-training-senator-hon-simon-birmingham-and">Gonski-lite</a> needs-based education funding model. </p>
<p>While the government’s cuts to higher education will still have a negative impact on <a href="https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/Media-and-Events/media-releases/Uni-cuts-aren-t-clever--but-merit-in-new-uni-equity-and-work-placement-measures#.WQvNFUWGPIV">universities</a>, and particularly <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/04/why-the-coalitions-university-changes-are-just-a-great-big-new-income-tax?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other">students</a>, the measures are less harsh than those in the 2014 budget. </p>
<p>It seems likely there will be some attempt in the budget to assist first home buyers. <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-29/will-the-budget-launch-a-new-era-in-social-housing/8480630">Various options</a> have been canvassed. </p>
<p>Turnbull has already tried to position himself as taking action on household energy costs by criticising renewable energy costs and ensuring gas reserves. Meanwhile, there are suggestions the government will improve <a href="https://theconversation.com/money-given-to-gps-from-ending-the-medicare-rebate-freeze-should-target-reform-76778">Medicare benefits</a> in an attempt to counter Labor’s controversial “Mediscare” campaign at the last election.</p>
<p>All budgets are about politics, not just economics. But this budget will be even more so. Not all the measures are working out politically. <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-03/gonski-2.0-to-be-vigorously-debated,-abbott-warns-turnbull/8494952">Abbott</a> is already threatening dissension over the impact of the education measures on <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-03/mixed-reaction-to-gonski-reforms-in-qld-schools/8493220">Catholic schools</a>. </p>
<p>This is a government in trouble. On one side it faces internal disunity and pressure from Labor’s emphasis on reducing inequality and fostering <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2015/s4425667.htm">“inclusive growth”</a>. On the other it has One Nation’s mobilisation of race and protectionism to appeal to the economically marginalised. </p>
<p>Then there is Cory Bernardi, the Greens, Nick Xenophon and a host of independents and other groups to consider. </p>
<p>After all, the budget is only the beginning. The next test is getting key measures through the Senate, perhaps even wedging Labor by deals with the Greens, so that the Coalition is in a stronger position to face the next election.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/75462/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carol Johnson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Turnbull government is desperately trying to develop a more convincing economic narrative around good economic management, nation-building and fairness.Carol Johnson, Professor of Politics, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/759202017-04-07T05:05:14Z2017-04-07T05:05:14ZVIDEO: Michelle Grattan on the Liberal Party campaign review<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MPQx0Nhj1RM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Liberal Party executives were due on Friday to examine an internal review into last year’s federal election campaign. Its delivery comes just days after the resignation of federal director Tony Nutt. </p>
<p>Michelle Grattan tells associate professor in journalism at the University of Canberra, Caroline Fisher, that the party HQ has got to share some of the responsibility for the campaign.</p>
<p>“But the main responsibility I would have thought lies with the politicians, the leader. Malcolm Turnbull ran a poor campaign,” Grattan says.</p>
<p>“It is true that the Liberal Party has not got a very good on-the-ground campaigning capacity, and that must be sheeted home to the federal executive. You don’t build that up just at the last moment, you’ve got to develop that throughout a term, throughout more than one term.</p>
<p>"Also, fundraising is clearly a problem for the Liberals these days. It used to be Labor that was crying poor and Liberals got a lot of money from business. Now business is more reluctant to kick in and I think that the campaign was under-resourced. </p>
<p>"But if the leader had been really firing, if people had seen a vision from Malcolm Turnbull, then some of those problems with the campaign wouldn’t have been so important.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/75920/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Liberal Party executives were due on Friday to examine an internal review of last year’s federal election campaign.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/725812017-02-07T23:21:59Z2017-02-07T23:21:59ZBernardi should have resigned his Senate seat: here’s why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/155979/original/image-20170207-14532-suj32v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Cory Bernardi speaks to the media after announcing he had quit the Liberal Party.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Senator Cory Bernardi’s decision to <a href="https://theconversation.com/bernardi-says-his-new-party-will-offer-a-principled-alternative-for-disillusioned-conservative-voters-72582">quit the Liberal Party</a> comes as no surprise to most political observers. For quite some time, and certainly since Malcolm Turnbull’s elevation to the Liberal leadership, Bernardi’s resignation from the party was always a distinct possibility.</p>
<p>However, his decision to quit the party without resigning from the Senate has sparked (the inevitable) condemnation from his former party colleagues. While he might well be feeling “reluctant and relieved”, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/peter-dutton-barnaby-joyce-slam-cory-bernardi-betrayal-20170206-gu6we5.html">many Coalition MPs are savage about this decision</a>. </p>
<h2>The perils of ratting out the party</h2>
<p>Parties have little mercy for those in their ranks who quit the party but continue to occupy their seat in parliament. Such persons are often decried as “deserters” or “rats”. </p>
<p>In this case, the displeasure with Bernardi runs even deeper. From the Liberal Party’s perspective, it believed it had gone to some lengths to accommodate some of the senator’s policy concerns. Yet the efforts to appease Bernardi ultimately proved insufficient to prevent him from tendering his resignation only seven months after the federal election that granted him a six-year Senate term. </p>
<p>On a more practical level, Bernardi’s resignation makes an already complex Senate even more so for the Turnbull government. Once the vacancies triggered by <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/western-australia/high-court-rules-disqualified-senator-rod-culleton-was-ineligible-for-election/news-story/d1900ac338ab7335381e3449309e164d">Rod Culleton</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-17/family-first-senator-bob-day-leaving-australian-senate/7938776">Bob Day</a> are filled, Bernardi will be among a 21-strong cross bench. The Turnbull government’s numbers have been reduced to 29 senators, 10 votes short of the 39 it needs to transact most business in the chamber.</p>
<p>High-profile, senior Liberal Party ministers, such as <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/peter-dutton-barnaby-joyce-slam-cory-bernardi-betrayal-20170206-gu6we5.html">George Brandis and Christopher Pyne</a>, have argued that Bernardi should resign as senator to give rise to a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casual_vacancies_in_the_Australian_Parliament#Senate">casual vacancy</a>. This would enable the party to select a replacement senator.</p>
<p>The problem for the Liberals is that Bernardi does not believe he is under any particular obligation to do this. For Bernardi, the decision to resign from the Liberal Party is <a href="http://www.corybernardi.com/australian_conservatives_launched">a matter of principle</a>, and therefore justified and imperative.</p>
<p>In constitutional terms, Bernardi is not obliged to quit the Senate just because he has resigned from the Liberal Party. The party can do little to force his hand, except to hope that he might eventually fall foul of the Constitution’s various <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Constitution">eligibility requirements</a> to serve in the federal parliament. This would be unlikely.</p>
<h2>Should Bernardi resign on ethical grounds?</h2>
<p>While there is no constitutional basis for Bernardi to resign from the chamber, there is a compelling ethical case for him to do so. </p>
<p>Before I outline my reasons, I must clarify the scope of my claim. First, the argument is not directed exclusively at Bernardi. This is an argument that should apply to any senator who quits his or her party, short of reasons of their party imploding, or being fired by the party. </p>
<p>Secondly, this argument is not one that I would extend to members of the House of Representatives who resign from their party. It is particular only to party defections when the member was elected in a seat through proportional representation.</p>
<p>My argument is essentially tied to two particular features of the Senate electoral system: the statewide basis of that system and group ticket voting. In combination, these elements greatly heighten the importance of the party label to the electoral success of major party candidates.</p>
<p>The statewide basis of the electoral system creates a geographical obstacle for all but a rarefied group of candidates to build a sufficiently strong personal mandate to secure a Senate quota. For this reason most independent candidates choose to contest lower house electorates rather than nominate for the Senate, where campaigning is conducted over a much wider, often more diverse electoral terrain.</p>
<p>Group ticket voting has further elevated the importance of the party label to the election of Senate candidates. Known colloquially as “above the line” voting, it allows parties to predetermine their preferred order of election of their candidates. While voters are permitted to vote for any candidate in any order that they wish, most do not. Only a very small proportion of voters cast their vote within the party list. </p>
<p>The combination of these features of the Senate electoral system means that most major party senators would struggle to make a convincing case that they were elected on the basis of personal appeal and support. </p>
<p>If we use Bernardi as the case in point, of the 345,767 votes cast for the South Australian Liberals at the 2016 election, he attracted just 2,043 of the first preference vote. Bernardi’s re-election had almost nothing to do with his personal vote and almost everything to do with the Liberal Party label and the favourable number two Senate spot that South Australian party officials awarded him on the party’s ticket.</p>
<p>Established parties can legitimately claim, therefore, that the single most decisive factor that accounts for the election of their senators is the power of the party label. For this reason, senators who quit their party under the current rules should feel compelled on ethical grounds to resign their vacancy, so that the democratic will of the party’s supporters is fulfilled.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/72581/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Narelle Miragliotta does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>While there is no constitutional basis for the former Liberal senator to resign from the chamber, there is a compelling ethical case for him to do so.Narelle Miragliotta, Senior Lecturer in Australian Politics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/686432016-11-16T01:18:19Z2016-11-16T01:18:19ZWhy a fractured nation needs to remember King’s message of love<p>The 2016 election campaign was arguably the most <a href="http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/02/2016-elections-nastiest-presidential-election-since-1972-213644">divisive</a> in a generation. And even after Donald Trump’s victory, people are struggling to understand what his presidency will mean for the country. This is especially true for many <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-attacks-idUSKBN1352NO">minority groups</a> who were singled out during the election campaign and have since experienced discrimination and threats of violence.</p>
<p>Yet, as geography teaches us, this is not the first time America has faced such a crisis – this divisiveness has a much longer history. I study the civil rights movement and the field of peace geographies. We faced similar crises related to the broader civil rights struggles in the 1960s. </p>
<p>So, what can we draw from the past that is relevant to the present? Specifically, how can we heal a nation that is divided along race, class and political lines? </p>
<p>As outlined by Martin Luther King Jr., the role of love, in engaging individuals and communities in conflict, is crucial today. By recalling King’s vision, I believe, we can have opportunities to build a more inclusive and just community that does not retreat from diversity but draws strength from it. </p>
<h2>King’s vision</h2>
<p>King spent his public career working toward ending segregation and fighting racial discrimination. For many people the pinnacle of this work occurred in Washington, D.C. when he delivered his famous “<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/17/i-have-a-dream-speech-text_n_809993.html">I have a dream” speech</a>. </p>
<p>Less well-known and often ignored is his later work on ending poverty and his fight on behalf of <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91626373">poor people</a>. In fact, when King was assassinated in Memphis he was in the midst of building toward a national march on Washington, D.C. that would have brought tens of thousands of economically disenfranchised people to advocate for policies that would ameliorate poverty. This effort – known as the <a href="http://epn.sagepub.com/content/45/9/2120.short">“Poor People’s Campaign</a>” – aimed to dramatically shift national priorities to the health and welfare of working peoples. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/146099/original/image-20161115-31120-1xxk12i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/146099/original/image-20161115-31120-1xxk12i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/146099/original/image-20161115-31120-1xxk12i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/146099/original/image-20161115-31120-1xxk12i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/146099/original/image-20161115-31120-1xxk12i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/146099/original/image-20161115-31120-1xxk12i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/146099/original/image-20161115-31120-1xxk12i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Martin Luther King Jr. speaking at interfaith civil rights rally, San Francisco Cow Palace, June 30, 1964.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">George Conklin</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Scholars such as <a href="https://geography.utk.edu/about-us/faculty/dr-derek-alderman/">Derek Alderman</a>, <a href="https://www.sfu.ca/geography/people/profiles/paul-kingsbury.html">Paul Kingsbury</a> and <a href="http://liberalarts.iupui.edu/directory/bio/odwyer">Owen Dwyer</a> have emphasized King’s work on behalf of civil rights in a 21st-century <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00330124.2012.658728">context</a>. They argue the civil rights movement in general, and King’s work specifically, holds lessons for social justice organizing and classroom pedagogy in that it helps students and the broader public see how the struggle for civil rights continues. </p>
<p>These arguments build on sociologist <a href="http://www.michaelericdyson.com/april41968/">Michael Eric Dyson,</a> who also argues we need to reevaluate King’s work as it reveals the possibility to build a 21st-century social movement that can address continued inequality and poverty through direct action and social protest. </p>
<h2>Idea of love</h2>
<p>King focused on the role of love as key to building healthy communities and the ways in which love can and should be at the center of our social interactions. </p>
<p>King’s final book, <a href="http://www.thekinglegacy.org/books/where-do-we-go-here-chaos-or-community">“Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community?</a>,” published in the year before his assassination, provides us with his most expansive vision of an inclusive, diverse and economically equitable U.S. nation. For King, love is a key part of creating communities that work for everyone and not just the few at the expense of the many. </p>
<p>Love was not a mushy or easily dismissed emotion, but was central to the kind of community he envisioned. King made distinctions between three forms of love which are key to the human experience. </p>
<p>The three forms of love are “Eros,” “Philia” and most importantly “Agape.” For King, Eros is a form of love that is most closely associated with desire, while Philia is often the love that is experienced between very good friends or family. These visions are different from Agape. </p>
<p>Agape, which was at the center of the movement he was building, was the moral imperative to engage with one’s oppressor in a way that showed the oppressor the ways their actions dehumanize and detract from society. He said, </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“In speaking of love we are not referring to some sentimental emotion. It would be nonsense to urge men to love their oppressors in an affectionate sense[…] When we speak of loving those who oppose us we speak of a love which is expressed in the Greek word Agape. Agape means nothing sentimental or affectionate; it means understanding, redeeming goodwill for all [sic] men, an overflowing love which seeks nothing in return. ” </p>
</blockquote>
<p>King further defined agape when he argued at the University of California at Berkeley that the concept of agape “stands at the center of the movement we are to carry on in the Southland.” It was a love that demanded that one stand up for oneself and tells those who oppress that what they were doing was wrong. </p>
<h2>Why this matters now</h2>
<p>In the face of violence directed at minority communities and in a deepening political divisions in the country, King’s words and philosophy are perhaps more critical for us today than at any point in the recent past. </p>
<p>As King noted, all persons exist in an interrelated community and all are dependent on each other. By connecting love to community, King argued there were opportunities to build a more just and economically sustainable society which respected difference. As he said, </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Agape is a willingness to go to any length to restore community… Therefore if I respond to hate with a reciprocal hate I do nothing but intensify the cleavages of a broken community.” </p>
</blockquote>
<p>King outlined a vision in which we are compelled to work toward making our communities inclusive. They reflect the broad values of equality and democracy. Through an engagement with one another as its foundation, agape provides opportunities to work toward common goals. </p>
<h2>Building a community today</h2>
<p>At a time when the nation feels so divided, there is a need to bring back King’s vision of agape-fueled community building. It would move us past simply seeing the other side as being wholly motivated by hate. The reality is that economic changes since the Great Recession have wrought tremendous pain and suffering in many quarters of the United States. Many Trump supporters were motivated by a desperate need to change the system. </p>
<p>However, simply dismissing the concerns voiced by many that Trump’s election has empowered <a href="https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/11/14/white-nationalists-rejoice-trumps-appointment-breitbarts-stephen-bannon">racists</a> and misogynists would be wrong as well.</p>
<p>These cleavages that we see will most likely intensify as Donald Trump prepares to take the oath of office as the 45th president of the United States. </p>
<p>To bridge these divisions is to begin a difficult conversation about where we are as a nation and where we want to go. Engaging in a conversation through agape signals a willingness to restore broken communities and to approach difference with an open mind.</p>
<p>It also exposes and rejects those that are using race and racism and fears of the “other” to advance a political agenda that intensifies the divisions in our nation.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68643/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joshua F.J. Inwood does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Martin Luther King Jr.’s vision of love was not sentimental. It demanded that individuals tell their oppressors what they were doing was wrong. How can this vision help with community-building today?Joshua F.J. Inwood, Associate Professor of Geography Senior Research Associate in the Rock Ethics Institute, Penn StateLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/686442016-11-15T02:54:14Z2016-11-15T02:54:14ZWhy there is no healing without grief<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145869/original/image-20161114-5078-1xxwd00.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Accepting grief is important for moving toward hope.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/shanonwise/3699142484/in/photolist-6CT5bG-oPFZKf-4PRTFr-4PRTMg-84L5H-dZGgPR-vXodP-49SnV-49KE7-vtgd-8fEBdd-jzXtU-atFeja-vtg9-49R7Q-6gTPGF-84L5j-bm1rrw-49Poz-oE4diz-49PoB-e2dGaY-m58UPK-8MLkSW-cxv5bb-6BvsQH-oE3iyZ-dZMX8q-dQmJ3A-6oar75-63VrdU-qoxbKE-aqXkm6-dZGfYZ-76MnCm-63MUCK-dQg81X-oWgFgX-m58JUd-ijH71N-aftAva-6uS9GK-c3YNPG-pBL99R-av95L-axnM4R-9T5N7q-e2dHVw-dwJn3x-9DpweH">Shanon Wise</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>For many women, people of color, LGBTQ people, Muslims and immigrants, the victory of Donald Trump seems to have endorsed discrimination against them. Acts of hatred against minorities are surfacing even more brazenly. </p>
<p>College campuses are reporting increasing numbers of incidents of <a href="https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/11/14/protests-and-incidents-spread-following-trump-election-victory">election-related harassment and intimidation</a>. Three days after the election, I saw a “Black Lives Matter” banner on a church wall in Denver splattered with bright red paint.</p>
<p>Many of us feel tremendous grief over what appears to be the end of a certain idea of American democracy. Amidst such pain and loss, many are also desperate for healing. Politicians on all sides are declaring, as <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-election-night-party-time-america-bind-wounds/story?id=43408896">Trump himself did on Nov. 9</a>, that “it is time for America to bind the wounds of division.” </p>
<p>The desire to begin healing is certainly understandable. But before we can even begin to hope for healing, we need to grieve. As a scholar and teacher, I explore the many fascinating ways in which biblical images, words and even the idea of the Bible help people make meaning in their lives. </p>
<p>To be sure, there is a lot in the Bible about healing. But there is at least as much about grieving. The biblical tradition emphasizes the importance of grieving before moving toward healing. </p>
<p>To grieve is to embrace the reality of pain and loss.</p>
<h2>The wounds are real</h2>
<p>For many, following the elections, faith in the idea of American democracy has died. Cultural historian <a href="http://billmoyers.com/story/farewell-america/">Neil Gabler’s “Farewell, America,”</a> published two days after the election, expresses powerfully this sense of the end of faith in America: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“America died on Nov. 8, 2016, not with a bang or a whimper, but at its own hand via electoral suicide…Whatever place we now live in is not the same place it was on Nov. 7. No matter how the rest of the world looked at us on Nov. 7, they will now look at us differently.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Indeed, irrespective of who got elected, the presidential race itself exposed mortal wounds on our body politic. We are not who we thought we were. </p>
<p>As the way to healing, pastors and religious leaders, including <a href="http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2016/november/anne-graham-lotz-on-how-the-church-can-help-the-nation-heal">Anne Graham Lotz</a>, daughter of evangelists <a href="https://billygraham.org/gallery/billy-and-ruth-graham-through-the-years/">Billy and Ruth Graham</a>, are calling for prayer and repentance: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“When God’s people will pray with a humble heart, repenting of our sins, then God promises He will hear our prayer; He will forgive our sin and the third element is that He will heal our land.”</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>What do our traditions tell us?</h2>
<p>Healing is not possible without grieving. The biblical tradition offers an invitation to sit with sadness before reaching for hope and healing. It does not simply allow for grief – it privileges it.</p>
<p>It dwells uncomfortably long in the valleys of loss and despair, refusing to ascend too quickly onto horizons of hope. </p>
<p>The Hebrew Scriptures, in fact, possess a rich vocabulary of grief. Behind the words “grief” and “grieve,” as I found in my research, there are 13 different Hebrew words with connotations ranging from physical injury, to sickness, to mourning, to rage, to agitation, to sighing, to tottering unsteadily to and fro. The most common expressions involve a mix of emotional and physical pain in the face of loss. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145871/original/image-20161114-5078-uf5vwd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145871/original/image-20161114-5078-uf5vwd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145871/original/image-20161114-5078-uf5vwd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145871/original/image-20161114-5078-uf5vwd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145871/original/image-20161114-5078-uf5vwd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145871/original/image-20161114-5078-uf5vwd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145871/original/image-20161114-5078-uf5vwd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Angel of Grief monument in the Hill family plot in Glenwood Cemetery in Houston, Texas.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/mwschaff/8739307295/in/photolist-ejgezZ-dXot6V-dXu8hN-8owpfc-dcPkht-dXotVn-nF4Hou-a6FKNC-68Soy6-AMkc9-7FhTGT-wQHLC-dXu6G5-64QzXd-AMkeX-C3m17-3X9rSs-6Y2Ezf-ejmXEy-e11914-nH5FCj-kQRdQA-6ZPtyg-nyhwxx-ey7R1-m4XqFj-nh5Yv3-aCSRw9-3oWyhr-4jszYm-81AVtq-kJ41zk-6XXE8V-7HF8oh-4BLsCY-w1ycT-9HvcnE-arLAs5-j3qkc-dcPneQ-24R2b-5pqXgk-697rbg-8K5VSe-pKzuaU-dfpncm-dyb7Rn-HtxDU-9tcnUa-ppkTJh">Mike Schaffner</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This privileging of grief over and before any hope of healing is powerfully expressed in the words of the Hebrew biblical prophets. As theologian Walter Brueggemann shows in his book <a href="http://www.eerdmans.com/Products/7072/reality-grief-hope.aspx">“Reality, Grief, Hope</a>,” the biblical prophets were not, as we often assume, predictors of the future.</p>
<p>Rather they were poets who, like poets today, offered alternative ways of seeing things – that is, to the way the empire (in their case ancient Israel or Judah) wanted people to see things. The prophet confronted ancient Israel’s imperial ideology of special blessing and national exceptionalism with the <a href="http://bible.oremus.org/?ql=346171951">realities of exploitation</a> and violence upon which its prosperity was gotten. </p>
<p>Addressing an audience that was in total denial that there were any serious problems in their society, the prophet gave voice to the realities of injustice, and grieved the pain and loss that was the result. They confronted the people’s denial with grief. </p>
<h2>The prophetic imagination</h2>
<p>Consider <a href="http://bible.oremus.org/?ql=345988108">these words</a> from the prophet Amos, who addressed the prosperous of northern Israel during the eighth century B.C.:</p>
<blockquote>
<pre class="highlight plaintext"><code> Alas for those who are at ease in Zion,
and for those who feel secure on Mount Samaria,
the notables of the first of the nations ...
Alas for those who lie on beds of ivory,
and lounge on their couches ...
but are not grieved over the ruin of Joseph!
Therefore they shall now be the first to go into exile,
and the revelry of the loungers shall pass away.
</code></pre></blockquote>
<p>Simultaneously pronouncing judgment for their exploitation of the poor and grief over their imminent downfall, the prophet cries out in horror for those who recline in denial of their ill-gotten prosperity and “are not grieved” (from the Hebrew word “chalah,” “made sick”) at the ruin all around.</p>
<p>Though they are guilty, Amos nonetheless laments that they “shall now be the first to go into exile” as a result. The prophet pronounces judgment from the inside, inviting “us” to look at ourselves, to stare at the wounds, to live into the pain, not as a path to healing but as reality in and of itself.</p>
<p>The crux of this “prophetic imagination” is grief. Then, and only then, is it even possible for the prophet to confront the despair of the empire in ruins with hope for the possibility of healing and restoration. </p>
<h2>Grief as activism</h2>
<p>I am sympathetic with those who feel driven to do something, indeed to resist despair and renew the struggle for justice. As the black feminist lawyer <a href="http://www.msmagazine.com/summer2011/verbalkarate.asp">Florynce Kennedy</a> famously said, </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Don’t agonize. Organize.”</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145856/original/image-20161114-5084-116q3bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145856/original/image-20161114-5084-116q3bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=334&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145856/original/image-20161114-5084-116q3bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=334&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145856/original/image-20161114-5084-116q3bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=334&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145856/original/image-20161114-5084-116q3bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145856/original/image-20161114-5084-116q3bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145856/original/image-20161114-5084-116q3bd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A ‘Black Lives Matter’ banner on a church wall in Denver splattered with bright red paint.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Timothy Beal</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But what if grief is a kind of activism? What if one of the most subversive acts right now is to give voice to our grief? To refuse to “move on”? Such grief denies denial its power to look away in desperate pursuit of healing. Just as there is no peace without justice, there is no healing without grief.</p>
<p>The day of Donald Trump’s election was also the anniversary of both <a href="https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005201">Kristallnacht</a> – the pogrom in 1938, when Nazi soldiers and German citizens attacked and killed many Jews and destroyed Jewish businesses, schools, and hospitals – and the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/places/berlin_wall">fall of the Berlin Wall</a> in 1989. </p>
<p>This coincidence reminds us that we together have the capacity for both atrocious horror and miraculous liberation. Even now. The difference may lie as much in how we grieve as in how we heal.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68644/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Timothy Beal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After Donald Trump’s victory, a scholar says the biblical prophets can help show us the way forward: Just as there is no peace without justice, there is no healing without grief.Timothy Beal, Professor of Religion and Chair of the Department of Religious Studies, Case Western Reserve UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/678312016-11-09T19:43:13Z2016-11-09T19:43:13ZWhy the Trump effect could increase bullying<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145282/original/image-20161109-19068-huljl5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">What has the 'Trump effect' been on children?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/juanfg/27649705816/in/photolist-J8iYeN-9gGtav-aB58qB-6kAdNB-6kEFcN-JtcoX3-6kEdMs-dvjV3V-DkBb6o-f5htfg-6kExbo-8ZaSQ5-qsbbUx-6kAnkV-4JGrmr-6kEjhE-6kEbKw-6kAshx-9pjoBx-G1xeDL-AN7Kzf-6kApxX-6kzXpi-GT4eJh-6kEy1C-6kDRm3-6kDSsN-6kApoF-6kDUvY-6kzKii-6kAq66-6kE2YA-6kzGwH-6kEeK1-5us3ED-6kzUbx-6kAgL4-6kDRHE-6kzWQP-6kEsk1-6kzXhX-6kDUJw-6kED9m-6kzYMV-6kAs7F-6kzS4H-6kEcFw-6kEck7-6kzSTX-6kEnjs">Juan</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Donald Trump has won the presidency, but not before launching one of the most ugly and fractious campaigns in American history. As the 2016 election season now comes to a close, there are signs that it has left scars behind, particularly in the schools of the United States. </p>
<p>The National Education Association (NEA), the nation’s largest teachers’ union, recently launched an information campaign to tie Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2016/10/trump_inspires_school_bullying.html">“inflammatory rhetoric”</a> to an increase in bullying in America’s schools. </p>
<p>At the same time, the nonprofit <a href="https://www.splcenter.org/">Southern Poverty Law Center</a> released survey data from the <a href="http://www.tolerance.org/">“Teaching Tolerance”</a> project that gave details about the <a href="https://www.splcenter.org/20160413/trump-effect-impact-presidential-campaign-our-nations-schools">toxic effects</a> Trump’s campaign rhetoric has had on teachers and students (and especially racial/ethnic minority students). </p>
<p>The SPLC report described immigrant students’ – especially Muslim and Latino immigrants – concerns about what might happen to them or their families after the election. Most respondents reported an increase in uncivil political discourse or anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant attitudes. Teachers reported reluctance to discuss the election in their classrooms due to fear of escalating this phenomenon.</p>
<p>I am a professor of special education and a behavioral science researcher currently involved in studying the effects of bullying prevention in schools. <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/Social_learning_and_personality_developm.html?id=-WhHAAAAMAAJ">Social learning theory tells us</a> that people learn from one another, via observation, imitation and modeling. </p>
<p>The most powerful models are those we consider to have higher status: older or more able children, parents, school adults and public figures such as celebrities and political candidates like Trump. </p>
<h2>Bullying is pervasive</h2>
<p>No matter what their experiences or background in growing up, most adults can remember at least one or two occasions during childhood where <a href="http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northwest/pdf/REL_2011114_sum.pdf">they were picked on</a>, <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J008v19n02_05">humiliated, intimidated</a>, or perhaps even beaten up. </p>
<p>Bullying incidents most often occur in school, <a href="https://www.stopbullying.gov/news/media/facts/#listing">where there is limited adult supervision</a> and monitoring. In the 2016 election campaign, <a href="https://www.splcenter.org/20160413/trump-effect-impact-presidential-campaign-our-nations-schools#students">teachers have reported</a> that students felt “emboldened” to “use slurs, engage in name-calling and make inflammatory statements toward each other.”</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145285/original/image-20161109-19062-6ys72b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145285/original/image-20161109-19062-6ys72b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145285/original/image-20161109-19062-6ys72b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145285/original/image-20161109-19062-6ys72b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145285/original/image-20161109-19062-6ys72b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145285/original/image-20161109-19062-6ys72b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145285/original/image-20161109-19062-6ys72b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bullying is pervasive.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/confirm/346159904?src=znWpW3zqqZsFMXunahdMnQ-3-98&id=346159904&size=medium_jpg">Girl image via www.shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In a short time period like an election cycle, we cannot scientifically prove a relationship between Donald Trump’s public behavior and a change in the way children behave. But it is important to consider what the effect of Trump’s rhetoric might be on teachers and schoolchildren. </p>
<p>An online survey conducted by The Southern Poverty Law Center’s <a href="http://www.tolerance.org/magazine/archives">Teaching Tolerance magazine</a> found that teachers have been hesitant to teach about the election largely out of fear of promoting more student conflict around the topic. In Portland, Oregon, a principal imposed a “gag order” on teachers and prohibited them from talking about the election. </p>
<p>But even if the teachers did not discuss the issues in the classroom, students were talking among themselves or on social media. In Massachusetts, an <a href="https://www.splcenter.org/20160413/trump-effect-impact-presidential-campaign-our-nations-schools#students">elementary school social worker described</a> what was happening to her eight-year-old son, who was adopted from Korea. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“He came home from school and recounted a conversation he’d had with his friends on the playground. Many … come from immigrant families and/or are black or brown. He told me they know that if Donald Trumpet [sic] was elected that we would have to move to another continent to be safe and that there would be a big war. He is very nervous about being sent away with my husband who is also Korean American.”</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Is ‘Trump effect’ leading to bullying?</h2>
<p>There are many theories about how bullying develops. A simple explanation is that of modeling, first researched and explained as <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/Social_learning_and_personality_developm.html?id=-WhHAAAAMAAJ">Social Learning Theory</a> by psychologist <a href="https://psychology.stanford.edu/abandura">Albert Bandura</a>. </p>
<p>This theory suggests that children imitate the words and behaviors they hear. “Attractive” role models (such as parents or others in authority such as political candidates) may have a stronger modeling effect.</p>
<p>When children watch television or other media and listen to their parents or others in authority talk about political candidates such as Trump and his statements, they learn to use the same language in their daily discourse. Trump’s own behaviors that children can see through the media (television, Twitter) can also serve as a model. We can’t prove this as a cause, but certainly there is substantial evidence from the aforementioned reports to suggest a strong relationship.</p>
<p>We know from new research that the earlier portrait of a young person who bullies as someone who is insecure and has low self-esteem is somewhat misleading. The latest research indicates that teen bullies – both boys and girls – <a href="http://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/center-for-adolescent-health/_includes/_pre-redesign/Bullying_HQP.pdf">tend to be confident</a>, with high self-esteem and may even have elevated social status among their peers. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145288/original/image-20161109-19068-dfxziz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/145288/original/image-20161109-19068-dfxziz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145288/original/image-20161109-19068-dfxziz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145288/original/image-20161109-19068-dfxziz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145288/original/image-20161109-19068-dfxziz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145288/original/image-20161109-19068-dfxziz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/145288/original/image-20161109-19068-dfxziz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A bully is not someone who is insecure, but someone confident.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/confirm/104313125?src=MQFKhtOtnQspgDUli9Nqew-1-8&id=104313125&size=vector_eps">Cartoon image via www.shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The point is that schools are diverse places. Children are routinely placed in classrooms, common areas, the bus, etc. with diverse students. Those students can become the targets of bullying and harassment based on their race/ethnicity, gender, disability or sexual orientation.</p>
<p>Even characteristics such as being smaller, overweight or wearing glasses can make a student a more vulnerable target. Trump’s seemingly endless – until now – misogynistic, racist, and <a href="http://www.stopableism.org/what.asp">“ableist”</a> (anti-disability) statements could provide the model for children to use in schools and elsewhere.</p>
<p>In his acceptance speech, he distanced himself from the nastiness of the campaign and avoided any mention of mass deportation of Muslims, torture of terrorism suspects or the building of a giant wall on the southern border.</p>
<h2>Stop bullying</h2>
<p>Requiring those who bully and harass to stop is of course complex and often difficult. But we can at least make sure our <a href="http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1286&context=sped_facpub">school personnel are supported</a> to learn and practice evidence-based strategies to prevent and respond to this type of behavior.</p>
<p>For example, schools could do regular surveys to find out more about the environment. But, at times, such as the 2016 election campaign, even such surveys may not be enough as new forms of bullying emerge.</p>
<p>So, to <a href="http://store.iirp.edu/dreaming-of-a-new-reality/">check bullying</a> both schools and families need to be actively involved in talking with children and modeling behavior that supports tolerance, respect and inclusion of all people. Families need to talk to their children so they can check them from bullying as well as being bullied. </p>
<p>Negative and toxic rhetoric will likely continue long after this election. But we need to work to ensure that our children inherit a world that is safe, civil and respectful.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/67831/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jeffrey R. Sprague receives funding from the U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice to study the impact of school climate and bullying prevention. He has received funding from the U.S. Department of Education to study the effects of school climate and behavioral supports for school-age students. </span></em></p>At this time, researchers cannot prove a direct relationship. But social learning theory shows that people learn from one another, via observation, imitation and modeling.Jeffrey R. Sprague, Professor of Special Education, University of OregonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/680462016-11-02T03:46:19Z2016-11-02T03:46:19ZExplainer: what is the challenge to Bob Day’s Senate seat all about?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/144146/original/image-20161102-12173-1hof7cr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Family First senator Bob Day, who has now resigned his Senate seat.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Sam Mooy</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Family First Senator Bob Day has resigned from the Senate, but <a href="https://theconversation.com/now-resigned-bob-day-may-have-been-ineligible-to-sit-in-senate-67984">controversy now rages</a> about whether or not he was validly elected. The argument is that he was disqualified under <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/s44.html">Section 44(v)</a> of the Constitution for holding an indirect pecuniary interest in an agreement with the Public Service. This matter concerns whether Day had such an interest in a contract with the Commonwealth. </p>
<p>The facts involved remain unclear, and it is hard to judge whether or not a breach of s 44(v) is likely to have occurred. It is especially difficult because his interest in the agreement was only indirect. The one High Court authority on the issue, <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1975/22.html">the Webster case</a>, is a judgment of a single judge back in 1975. </p>
<p>As it is quite old and has been the subject of much criticism, it is unknown whether the High Court would follow it or develop different criteria for determining what is a disqualifying pecuniary interest.</p>
<h2>Why does it make a difference, given that Senator Day has resigned from the Senate?</h2>
<p>Normally such cases are brought for the purpose of removing a person from the Senate. </p>
<p>The answer in this case is that it makes a difference in relation to who is chosen to replace him in the Senate. This is a particularly sensitive issue in a Senate that the government does not control.</p>
<p>If Senator Day was validly elected on July 2, 2016 and then resigned his seat in November 2016, <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/coaca430/s15.html">section 15</a> of the Constitution would apply. It states that where the place of a senator becomes vacant before the expiration of his term of service, his replacement is chosen by the houses of parliament of the state from which he was chosen, in a joint sitting. So the South Australian parliament would choose Senator Day’s replacement. </p>
<p>Section 15 was amended in 1977 to make it clear that the South Australian parliament can only choose a person from the same party to which the outgoing senator belonged at the time of his or her election. The rationale is that if the people vote for a representative of one party, the replacement of that senator should come from the same party. So it would be up to the Family First party to nominate their choice of senator, which the South Australian parliament, in a joint sitting, would then formally choose.</p>
<p>During the period of the Whitlam government, there had been some fudging of the convention about appointing a person from the same party. For example, the Queensland Parliament <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/stateline/qld/content/2005/s1504841.htm">appointed Albert Field</a> to fill a Senate seat vacated by a Labor member. Field was technically a member of the Labor Party, but was opposed to the Whitlam government. </p>
<p>In order to avoid this type of problem, the Constitution was amended so that if a person is appointed from the relevant political party, but then expelled from that party before taking up his or her seat, he or she “shall be deemed not to have been so chosen”. This means that the party effectively chooses a senator’s replacement where there is a casual vacancy.</p>
<h2>What if Senator Day was not validly elected?</h2>
<p>If Senator Day was never validly elected at the July 2016 election, then it is more complicated. In the past, the High Court has resolved the issue by ordering a re-count of the vote, distributing the votes as if the disqualified senator did not exist. This usually means that it is the next person on the party’s ticket who is elected. On this basis, the second person on the Family First ticket in South Australia would most likely be elected. </p>
<p>This is complicated on this occasion, however, by two factors. First, it is possible that there are enough “below the line” votes for Senator Day personally that then went to different candidates, rather than the second Family First candidate, to alter the outcome. </p>
<p>Secondly, there would be doubts about the validity of the “above the line” votes for Family First, because a party requires two candidates to register its ticket above the line. If Day was disqualified, this would mean there was only one. It would therefore be arguable that all the above the line votes for Family First would not be counted, with preferences instead being passed on to the candidates of the next party preferenced on each ballot paper. </p>
<p>This could result in Labor or One Nation picking up Senator Day’s seat. As the Senate <a href="https://theconversation.com/senate-voting-changes-pass-so-how-do-we-elect-the-upper-house-now-55641">voting laws have recently changed</a> to an optional preferential above the line system – a system that <a href="https://theconversation.com/high-court-unanimously-rejects-challenge-to-senate-voting-reform-59170">Senator Day challenged</a> in the High Court – we have no relevant precedent as to how his disqualification would affect the recount in these circumstances.</p>
<p>The time for challenging the validity of the election of a candidate has now expired. However, the houses of parliament can still refer to the High Court, sitting as a Court of Disputed Returns, any question concerning the validity of the election of a senator or member. </p>
<p>The government proposes to ask the Senate to make such a referral on Monday. If the Senate agrees, it will be up to the High Court to decide these difficult constitutional issues. One way or the other, the outcome will have an impact upon the composition of the Senate.</p>
<p><em>This article has been corrected to accurately reflect the pecuniary interest issue.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68046/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anne Twomey has received funding from the Australian Research Council and occasionally does consultancy work for governments and inter-governmental bodies.</span></em></p>Changes to Senate voting laws and the particular case of Senator Bob Day make for an unprecedented constitutional tangle, and one that will change the make-up of the Senate.Anne Twomey, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/667362016-10-31T02:11:56Z2016-10-31T02:11:56ZWhy America urgently needs to improve K-12 civic education<p>The <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-remains-defiant-ahead-of-debate-as-surrogates-grapple-with-tape-fallout/2016/10/09/9a95a09a-8e28-11e6-9c85-ac42097b8cc0_story.html">tone</a> of this presidential election, often called <a href="http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-04-29/just-how-uncivil-election-2016-mits-media-lab-has-some-charts-you-should-see">“uncivil,”</a> has <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/civic-education-in-the-age-of-trump/477501/">led many</a> to call for an urgent improvement of civic education in America. </p>
<p>Civic education <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Controversy-in-the-Classroom-The-Democratic-Power-of-Discussion/Hess/p/book/9780415962292">can teach citizens</a> how to deliberate, even when they have political differences. It can enable citizens to find solutions to many problems such as school attendance, economic development or community safety. </p>
<p>For over a decade, we’ve worked as researchers <a href="http://civicyouth.org/">investigating</a> a wide range of questions related to youth civic participation. Over this period, we have observed how civic life has been transformed. New technologies emerged as well as new political and social movements, such as the Tea Party, Occupy Wall Street and the movement for black lives – all of which have changed civic life. Indeed, today’s youth have a lot <a href="http://ypp.dmlcentral.net/projects/youth-participatory-politics-survey-project">more opportunities</a> to express their political views and take action through <a href="Change.org">online platforms.</a> </p>
<p>However, significant gaps remain in one of the most basic forms of civic participation – voter turnout. <a href="http://www.civicyouth.org/maps/elections/">Only about 40-45 percent</a> of 18-to-29-year-olds turned out to vote in the 2012 election, and gaps among youth remain a concern in 2016. </p>
<p>One big reason for these voting rates is in the way many public K-12 schools are teaching civics: Students may be learning about the mechanics of government, but <a href="http://civicyouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/State-Civic-Ed-Requirements-Fact-Sheet-2012-Oct-19.pdf">they are not always required</a> to learn the skills needed for civic participation. Teachers, meanwhile, have voiced concern that lessons about elections and politics will be perceived by some as partisan.</p>
<h2>The missing young voters</h2>
<p>Currently, there are dramatic gaps among youth when it comes to voter turnout. The young people who regularly vote <a href="http://civicyouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/2012-Exit-Poll-by-Ed-Attainment-Final.pdf">look like the youth population</a> as a whole because youth do not vote at the same rates. Our analysis of state and federal voting data shows that young people without college experience remain underrepresented.</p>
<p>For example, in the 2012 election, 56 percent of youth with any college experience voted compared to only 29 percent of youth with no college experience. These young people between 18 and 29 make up 40 percent of the youth population. </p>
<p>The gap was just as large in the high turnout election of 2008, where 62 percent of youth with any college experience voted, compared to only 36 percent of youth with no college experience. Our analysis of census data suggests this trend is not new and this gap has existed for decades.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/143730/original/image-20161028-15810-1ov3rz8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/143730/original/image-20161028-15810-1ov3rz8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143730/original/image-20161028-15810-1ov3rz8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143730/original/image-20161028-15810-1ov3rz8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=388&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143730/original/image-20161028-15810-1ov3rz8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143730/original/image-20161028-15810-1ov3rz8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143730/original/image-20161028-15810-1ov3rz8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=488&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Youth turnout by education.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://civicyouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/CIRCLE_2013FS_outhVoting2012FINAL.pdf">CIRCLE</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why is civic participation of youth so low?</h2>
<p>Civic education can not only increase youth voting, but in doing so also begin to <a href="http://civicyouth.org/commission-on-youth-voting-and-civic-knowledge-releases-report/">close historic voting gaps</a>. Our research shows, however, civic education itself remains a neglected area in in American schools. </p>
<p>Most states do not consider civic education as a vital part of student learning. While social studies is part of the curriculum in most states, <a href="http://civicyouth.org/commission-on-youth-voting-and-civic-knowledge-releases-report/">reports from 2013 show</a> only eight states assess students’ civic performance. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/143744/original/image-20161028-15793-111mxt8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/143744/original/image-20161028-15793-111mxt8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143744/original/image-20161028-15793-111mxt8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143744/original/image-20161028-15793-111mxt8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143744/original/image-20161028-15793-111mxt8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143744/original/image-20161028-15793-111mxt8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/143744/original/image-20161028-15793-111mxt8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Comments from young people who participated in a CIRCLE project reflecting on their high school experiences.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://civicyouth.org/thats-not-democracy-how-out-of-school-youth-engage-in-civic-life-and-what-stands-in-their-way/">CIRCLE</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The curriculum itself leaves much to be desired. Too often, in public schools, civic education is reduced to learning history and dry information about governmental processes. Students learn significantly more historical information – for instance, about wars and individual people – than skills that can teach them how to solve problems.</p>
<p>Research into state social studies curriculum standards shows they <a href="http://civicyouth.org/do-states-require-students-learn-about-political-ideology/">often do not include learning</a> in detail about modern parties and their ideologies. The results differ by state, but the general trends are striking. For example, this research indicates that “Democrat” and “Republican” are not often found in school curricula and only 10 states ask that students learn what these parties stand for.</p>
<p>It’s difficult to understand how a young person would understand American politics without this ability to differentiate. </p>
<h2>Other challenges</h2>
<p>In addition, schools don’t help students connect their learning to practice. It is students <a href="http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED503646">in wealthier schools, or who are on a “college track,”</a> who are more likely to find opportunities to learn about civic engagement through discussions or hands-on research that allows them to work on finding solutions to civic problems that they care about. </p>
<p>For example, a group of high school students in Chicago, after <a href="http://www.mikvachallenge.org/blog/youth-voice-on-the-ballot-in-the-49th-ward-pb-process/">learning</a> how to make their voices heard on civic issues, campaigned to have bus stop benches along major bus routes. </p>
<p>Another big challenge when it comes to civic education is public resistance to teaching anything remotely connected to electoral politics in public schools.</p>
<p>In a less controversial election (2012), <a href="http://civicyouth.org/how-civics-is-taught-in-america-a-national-survey-of-civics-and-u-s-government-teachers/">teachers</a> told us they believed that they would receive a pushback if they taught about politics and elections. </p>
<p>In a national survey of over 700 teachers we conducted during the spring after the 2012 election, more than one in four current teachers of US government or civics said that they would expect criticism from parents or other adults if they taught the election that had taken place that fall. Only one-third (38 percent) said they would get strong support from their district. </p>
<p>Concerns about introducing elections to classrooms are misplaced, since research has not found patterns of teachers influencing students’ preferences in elections. We found in 2012 that taking civics <a href="http://civicyouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/What-Young-Adults-Know-Fact-Sheet-20131.pdf">didn’t correlate with either</a> partisanship or vote choice.</p>
<h2>Improving turnout</h2>
<p>Existing research demonstrates that engaging youth in elections before they reach the age of 18 can increase the likelihood of voting. Classroom teaching practices where young people learn about current issues or can <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01957470290055501">practice having conversations</a> with different viewpoints involved can start to close these gaps. </p>
<p>These more active teaching practices allow youth to increase knowledge and develop skills, such as how to communicate effectively with someone with differing views. In turn, this can also build a young person’s confidence in their own ability to participate. <a href="http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED558007">Knowledge alone is not enough</a> to ensure future civic engagement. </p>
<p><a href="http://civicyouth.org/commission-on-youth-voting-and-civic-knowledge-releases-report/">Our research shows</a> that classroom teaching practices were positively related to informed voting, the idea of voting with accurate knowledge about the democratic system and preferred candidates. </p>
<p>Additionally, <a href="http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/nyulpp13&div=20&g_sent=1&collection=journals">preregistration laws</a>, which allow 16- and 17-year-olds to preregister and then automatically join the voter rolls when they turn 18, boost turnout. Appearance on a list of registered voters means that these preregistered youth are more likely to be contacted by parties and interest groups that use lists of registered voters for outreach. </p>
<p>As a result, easing youth into civic participation, through preregistration and starting to experience structured civic participation in the classroom, can prove valuable to later engagement, like voting.</p>
<p>Voting <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/becoming-a-habitual-voter-inertia-resources-and-growth-in-young-adulthood/9EA1F561496D714346491B25B0D52239">is habit-forming</a>. Closing gaps early by strengthening the connection between school civic education and civic participation could ensure that our electorate will more fully represent the U.S. population.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66736/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Abby Kiesa is the Director of Impact at CIRCLE, a national research center on youth civic education and engagement at Tufts University's Tisch College of Civic Life. Abby has worked on research projects funded by private foundations include: the Charles F. Kettering Foundation, Youth Engagement Fund, and the Democracy Fund, the Spencer Foundation, CloseUp Foundation, Bonner Foundation, Corporation for National and Community Service, The Pew Charitable Trusts, S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation and the Omidyar Network.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span> Peter Levine has received funding from: Abt Associates American Association of University Women Aspen Institute Beldon Foundation, JEHT Foundation, Carnegie Corporation of New York, and Solidago Fund Bill of Rights Institute (BORI) Bonner Foundation Bridging Theory to Practice Carnegie Corporation of New York Case Foundation Center for Public Integity (CPI) Civic Enterprises LLC Close Up Foundation Corporation for National and Community Service Deliberative Democracy Consortium Democracy Fund Democracy Fund with Knight Foundation and McCormick Foundation Engelhard Foundation Ford Foundation Ford Foundation Foundation for Civic Leadership and The Bernard and Audre Rapoport Foundation Generation Engage Grosvenor Fund, National Geographic Foundation Indiana Humanities Council Jobs for the Future Kellogg Foundation (via Brandeis University prime) Kettering Foundation Knight Foundation Massachusetts Department of Education National Conference on Citizenship Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek. New America Foundation Next Generation Learning Challenge Omidyar Network Online News Association Poynter Institute S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation Spencer Foundation State of Florida through University of South Florida The Florence and John Schumann Foundation The McCormick Foundation The Nonzero Foundation The Pew Charitable Trusts The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation Tides Foundation US Department of Education WT Grant Foundation. He is affiliated with: Paul J. Aicher Foundation, Director (2009-present) Discovering Justice (2013-present) Charles F. Kettering Foundation, Trustee (2004-present; program committee chair 2012-14) Street Law, Inc., Director and Program Committee Chair (2004-present)
Partners</span></em></p>Only about 40-45 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds turned out to vote in the 2012 election. Civic education can improve youth turnout. But civic education itself remains neglected in US schools.Abby Kiesa, Director of Impact, Tufts UniversityPeter Levine, Associate Dean for Research and Lincoln Filene Professor of Citizenship & Public Affairs, Tufts UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/645922016-09-28T03:49:44Z2016-09-28T03:49:44ZTurnbull will not succeed as prime minister unless he unites his party<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137332/original/image-20160912-3796-5e0w3m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Malcolm Turnbull is something of an odd-man-out in the Liberal Party.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>When he displaced Tony Abbott as Liberal Party leader, Malcolm Turnbull ascended to what has traditionally been thought of as a position of some power within the party. </p>
<p>The Liberal Party is something of a top-down organisation in which the parliamentary leader forms the ministry and defines the party’s policy agenda. The party organisation exists not to give direction on policy, but to support the leader with resources to run election campaigns.</p>
<p>The partyroom is expected to get behind the leader to show unity and eschew ideology in order to maximise the party’s appeal to a pragmatic “middle Australia”. </p>
<p>As author <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=dkgQAQAAIAAJ&source=gbs_similarbooks">Katharine West</a> so succinctly put it, the Liberal Party was about “power without ideology”. Ideology, factions and organisations telling the parliamentary wing what to do were meant to be the burdens of the Labor Party.</p>
<p>So, the prerogatives of leadership were assumed to be available to Turnbull when he became leader. There was an expectation in some quarters of a shift in government policy away from some of the things that defined the approach of Abbott, his more socially conservative predecessor. This clearly has not happened.</p>
<p>Rather, there is an impression that the Coalition lacks direction on policy and is under siege from a group of ultra-conservatives who are fixated on matters like blocking marriage equality and unwinding racial vilification laws. </p>
<p>To add to his woes, the free-market economic hardliners who toy with ideas such as raising the GST rate and cutting government expenditure have also been hyperactive, driven partly by frustration with Turnbull’s dithering on economic policy.</p>
<p>The most charitable assessment right now would be that Turnbull appears to be struggling as prime minister. His inability to exercise the sort of influence that leadership is supposed to grant under Liberal Party rules is part of his problem.</p>
<p>One explanation for this might be that the old Liberal traditions no longer apply because the party itself has changed. The middle-of-the-road party West described has transformed into something more ideological. This may in turn reflect the nexus between the party members, who have significant powers over preselection, and the MPs they preselect. </p>
<p>In the safe seats in state and federal politics, and in the Senate tickets, the Liberal organisation is increasingly preselecting people of firm ideas espousing values-based politics. This might be about the need for conservative social values or free market economics.</p>
<p>Turnbull won his preselection for Wentworth in 2004 on the back of <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/06/1065292502033.html">a good old-fashioned branch-stack</a>. This involved marshalling friends and associates to displace sitting Liberal member <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian?MPID=00AMQ">Peter King</a> – much to the annoyance of the NSW Liberal organisation at the time. </p>
<p>That preselection was a throwback to the old days before the dominance of rigidly disciplined political parties. Back then, a notable local could gather supporters from the local parish to elect him, after which he might participate in the leadership politics of the parliament. </p>
<p>It even resonated with the type of candidate that was common during the Menzies era – male, a success in business or community affairs, critical of unions, holding moderately liberal or conservative outlooks, but also pragmatic.</p>
<p>These days Liberal preselections are a battlefield in which branch-member ideologues or members of various factions (“moderates”, “conservatives”, “uglies”, “Krogerites”, “Costelloites” and so on) slug it out. The partyroom reflects the success or failures of the contest. </p>
<p>With his old-school preselection, his association with causes such as republicanism, and his moderate, modern and cosmopolitan views, Turnbull is something of an odd-man-out in the contemporary Liberal Party. That he should end up being its parliamentary leader not once but twice is testament to his ambition and tenacity.</p>
<p>To grab the leadership is an achievement. But to be able to consolidate and survive (let alone actually do anything) is something else again. </p>
<p>Insights on how to do it can be gained from successful past Liberal leaders Robert Menzies, Malcolm Fraser and John Howard. They all had internal critics, enemies and rivals, and all had firm views on some issues. But they were good at keeping the parliamentary wing unified and disciplined, sometimes with clever strategies. </p>
<p>Howard, for example, was adept at utilising conscience voting to deal with morality issues that had the potential to divide his partyroom. </p>
<p>Howard, as a social conservative himself, was also very good at absorbing the occasional defeat on some of these conservative causes. That’s because he had a more urgent aspiration: to keep his party united (mindful, no doubt, of the mayhem caused by people like Andrew Peacock and Joh Bjelke-Petersen during those bleak years in opposition between 1983 and 1996).</p>
<p>Menzies, Fraser and Howard were also adept at winning elections. Interestingly, Abbott’s electoral success didn’t save his leadership, because opinion polls have become a major test of leadership viability. This is hardly surprising, for wanting to win elections is the thing that binds moderates, social conservatives and everyone else in the party room.</p>
<p>So now we get to the essence of Turnbull’s leadership problem, of which the agitation of the Cory Bernardis in the partyroom is only a minor part. If Turnbull had any authority as leader when he took over from Abbott, it dissipated completely at the <a href="http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDefault-20499.htm">2016 election</a>. Any leader who loses 13 lower house seats and allows the populist right to consolidate in the Senate – after promising to get rid them – is not in a great political position.</p>
<p>In truth, Turnbull is not going to be able to do anything more than grimly hang on and hope that either the opinion polls don’t go down further or the memory of Labor’s leadership woes stops his colleagues from putting him to the sword. </p>
<p>Turnbull is an odd moderate in a party with many liberal economic and socially conservative hardliners. That he nearly lost an election and helped revive the political career of Pauline Hanson will severely test his ambition and tenacity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/64592/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick Economou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Liberal Party is increasingly preselecting parliamentarians of firm, values-based ideas, leading to a more ideological and riven party.Nick Economou, Senior Lecturer, School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/648222016-09-07T20:12:28Z2016-09-07T20:12:28ZRedressing, not exacerbating, inequality is the real moral challenge for this government<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/136526/original/image-20160905-31623-gvdncp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The government is keen to push its omnibus savings bill through parliament.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A purported priority for this 45th parliament is to tackle the deficit, last encountered in the budget items just before the federal election campaign. </p>
<p>Would it be affected by the close result and odd voting patterns? No, the government claims – its win was the mandate it sought.</p>
<p>Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull claimed that the passing of the budget repair bills was more than just political gain. He doubled down on his economic message ahead of parliament’s return, describing budget repair as a <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-29/malcolm-turnbull-pushes-labor-to-support-budget-savings/7796390%5D(http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-29/malcolm-turnbull-pushes-labor-to-support-budget-savings/7796390">“fundamental moral challenge”</a>. He demanded the opposition support the <a href="http://sjm.ministers.treasury.gov.au/media-release/074-2016/">omnibus bill</a> in its entirety, as Labor “assumed passage of it in its election costings document”.</p>
<p>This sets an odd tone for a “moral” claim, as the target of most of the bill’s proposed 24 cuts are the poor and vulnerable. This is in stark contrast to another bill for <a href="http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/federal-budget/the-big-problem-with-the-80k-tax-cut/news-story/107528e698dc528a6fb29e464c84cb73">tax cuts for those earning A$80,000 plus</a>.</p>
<p>These claimed priority items make it clear the government’s budget “repairs” will increase overall income inequities, and if supported by Labor, could further exacerbate the distrust of the “elites”. </p>
<p>The priorities in Turnbull’s speech seemed to focus on punishing the least powerful by cutting their payments. While picking on welfare recipients has been around for a long time, its current use is dicey, given that <a href="http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseStateFirstPrefsByParty-20499-NAT.htm">24% of formal voters indicate</a> increasing distrust of major parties.</p>
<p>Both here and overseas, there are disturbing signs of the damage of inequalities. The rising proportion of outlier candidates in the recent election match worldwide evidence that populism is rising in response to the increased inequities in the developed world – for example, the rise of Donald Trump. </p>
<p>The Brexit polls and data produced by the IMF suggest that the focus on market models may damage both <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/neoliberalism-is-increasing-inequality-and-stunting-economic-growth-the-imf-says-a7052416.html">economic growth and democratic legitimacy</a>. And the current ABC Boyer Lectures, delivered by Michael Marmot, question whether inequalities undermine <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/boyer-lectures-michael-marmot-social-determinants-ill-health/7636982">health and national well-being outcomes</a>. </p>
<p>These all suggest that any government that fails to tackle emerging political and economic inequities may create more problems.</p>
<h2>Who will be affected?</h2>
<p>Buried in the governor-general’s <a href="http://australianpolitics.com/2016/08/30/cosgrove-speech-opening-45th-parliament.html">speech opening this parliament</a> is a brief mention of the cashless welfare card. </p>
<p>This is a further sign again of increased contempt for those who are not in paid work – and that is not just the unemployed. <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/6224.0.55.001">New data from the ABS</a> family work status survey show there were around 329,200 “jobless” families with dependants in June 2015. In those families, there were 662,100 dependants aged less than 25 years, 85% of whom were children under 15. </p>
<p>In recent years, the proportion of jobless families with dependants has remained stable at around 11%. These cover carers, people with disabilities, the sick, students and parents with young or multiple children.</p>
<p>The omnibus bill – to which the government attached its hyperbolic demand for not leaving debts to our grandchildren – includes 24 items. Most of these, in <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/24-shades-of-nasty-the-devil-in-the-detail-of-treasurer-scott-morrisons-6-billion-omnibus-savings-bill-20160901-gr6ddm.html">a neat summary article</a>, are described by Jessica Irvine as “24 shades of nasty”. Some are particularly toxic.</p>
<p>I have further summarised 13 of the meaner items below, with their proposed savings, which would add only just over half of the $6 billion or so expected to be saved over the four-year forward estimates. This is hardly serious deficit-cutting, but will cause real pain to those who rely on them.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>cuts in support for students and earlier FEE-HELP repayment ($3.3 million);</p></li>
<li><p>abolish bonus for those getting off Newstart and holding a job for 12 months ($242.1 million);</p></li>
<li><p>no overlap period for those moving from Newstart to paid work ($61.5 million);</p></li>
<li><p>cuts to dental services ($52.4 million);</p></li>
<li><p>two-year wait for immigrants to claim welfare payments ($312.5 million);</p></li>
<li><p>cuts to paid parental leave ($133.7 million);</p></li>
<li><p>cuts to fringe benefits valuing for other payments ($132.1 million);</p></li>
<li><p>no backdating of Carers Allowance ($108.6 million);</p></li>
<li><p>cuts to family payments and other parental leave ($330.9 million);</p></li>
<li><p>cuts to income support for mentally ill people confined by serious criminal offence ($37.8 million);</p></li>
<li><p>cuts to energy supplement for recipients of disability support pension, carer and Newstart payments ($1.29 billion);</p></li>
<li><p>tighter subsidies for high-need aged-care residents ($80.5 million); and</p></li>
<li><p>tougher repayments of debts of welfare recipients ($157.8 million).</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Apart from the Newstart savings, the forward estimates are not impressive. And the situation of those on Newstart is already grim, without further cuts. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/workplace-relations/caught-in-an-unemployment-netherworld-too-young-to-retire-too-old-to-get-a-job-20160823-gqyv2w.html">An article in the SMH</a> on research from the Brotherhood of St Laurence has found that 40% of recipients of employment services last year were mature-age Australians who spent more than a year on income support. </p>
<p>It pointed out that more than one-third of Newstart payments go to people who are not even expected to look for work as they are sick, caring for others, in training, or cannot look for work.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/malcolm-turnbulls-dole-cuts-will-hit-older-australians-the-hardest-20160903-gr817b.html">Another article</a> shows increasing numbers of older people on Newstart (10,000 extra since 2012, with more than half staying on the payment for at least two years). All these data suggest that what was once seen as a short-term payment has now become long term for those who meet prejudice and lack opportunities in finding paid work.</p>
<h2>Ignoring the fairness question at their peril</h2>
<p>So why is the government making these cuts their “moral” demand for support? And why has Labor not offered clear opposition? </p>
<p>Despite the clear public and political responses to the basic unfairness of these and similar cuts in the 2014 budget, the government is pressing ahead with these measures by way of its wafer-thin majority. Have neither of the major parties has learned anything from the election? </p>
<p>Both major parties would be wise to listen to the messages coming from a grumpy electorate that has indicated it wants serious leadership, not just political game-playing and increased unfairness.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Eva Cox will be online for an Author Q&A between 11am and noon AEST on Friday, 9 September, 2016. Post any questions you have in the comments below.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/64822/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Eva Cox does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>We need to ask on what basis the government is making its budget savings a ‘moral’ issue, and how the opposition can possibly support it.Eva Cox, Professorial Fellow, Jumbunna IHL, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/628282016-08-25T20:21:13Z2016-08-25T20:21:13ZAustralia needs to lead again on democratic innovation<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/133044/original/image-20160804-12201-1krqfpr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The imperative for major reform of Australia’s political and policy processes is more real and urgent than ever.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A week has always been a long time in politics, but now it is longer than ever. In a world of increasingly truncated media cycles, short-term politics and fragmented parliaments, the political world is being splintered into more and more singular events.</p>
<p>This means more news, events and antics are crammed into a political week and analysed in blow-by-blow detail. Combine that with an increasingly volatile electorate and the question is: what’s the use of predicting the political week ahead in this age of democratic disruption, let alone an entire electoral cycle?</p>
<p>But sometimes when micro-events seem chaotic and disconnected, the overall patterns are more obvious.</p>
<h2>What will prevail?</h2>
<p>The outcome of the 2016 federal election – with its <a href="http://insidestory.org.au/the-upside-of-the-falling-big-party-vote">unprecedented voter support of independents and minor parties</a> – highlighted that the dam wall of public dissatisfaction with the major parties and their disconnected way of “doing” democracy is near-to-bursting.</p>
<p>This makes both the longer-term trends and dynamics of federal politics and parliament predictable. It also makes the imperative for major reform of Australia’s political and policy processes more real and urgent than ever.</p>
<p>Here’s a snapshot of the dynamics that will prevail in the 45th federal parliament if the reform agenda continues to exclude major change to Australia’s system of democratic governance.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The major parties will triple-down on their combative tactics, fearmongering and negative short-termism for no other reason than these were their key take-outs on <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-scare-campaigns-like-mediscare-work-even-if-voters-hate-them-62279">what “worked” in the election</a>. </p></li>
<li><p>There’ll be no lasting attempt to reach across parliament’s aisles to tackle a great and growing list of national challenges. Parliament will achieve little of real policy substance. </p></li>
<li><p>Standards as well as public perceptions of political leadership will <a href="https://theconversation.com/now-for-the-big-question-who-do-you-trust-to-run-the-country-58723">continue to deteriorate</a>. </p></li>
<li><p>The combination of the above will leave voters feeling even more disconnected and disillusioned with the state of politics. </p></li>
<li><p>Independents and minor parties will secure more seats in the next election, accelerating the process of fragmenting the House of Representatives into the same unworkable political kaleidoscope as the Senate. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>This will set up a dynamic of negativity and dysfunction for the 46th parliament more pervasive than the one now starting. Parliament will become just about unworkable. And Australia’s economy and polity will begin a painful and potentially irreversible submergence.</p>
<h2>What can be done?</h2>
<p>It’s all depressing stuff. This is even more the case given several innovations going in other levels of government around Australia that would help solve these federal ills.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://indaily.com.au/news/2015/08/13/weatherills-plan-to-create-a-new-democracy/">South Australian</a> and <a href="http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/citizens-jury-to-decide-on-future-council-for-geelong/">Victorian</a> governments have been trialling <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/futuretense/citizens-juries-and-deliberative-democracy/5762684">new systems of decision-making</a> at both state and local government level to bring citizens directly into the policymaking process. </p>
<p>Innovations like <a href="https://theconversation.com/city-calls-on-jury-of-its-citizens-to-deliberate-on-melbournes-future-59620">citizens’ juries</a> and <a href="http://www.participatorybudgeting.org">participatory budgeting</a> are being piloted. These two states understand growing citizen anger with being shut out from real policymaking. They realise this is not politically sustainable.</p>
<p>These innovations are based on the very logical view that ordinary Australians – in this age of unprecedented information access and connectivity – have as much knowledge and expertise on key policy issues as traditional decision-makers like ministers and departmental experts.</p>
<p>And, by giving citizens a direct, collaborative say in the decisions that most affect them, they assume “ownership” of policy decisions, even if they do not agree with the final outcome.</p>
<p>This in turn leads to greater political consensus, citizen engagement and policy depth. These are the commodities most in short supply in our increasingly combative, fragmented federal political system.</p>
<p>While governance reforms such as these are gathering pace outside Canberra, those inside the federal bubble are effectively ignoring them. The “high” politics of federal policy and parliament, according to this view, is far too complex and important for ordinary citizens to have direct and continuous involvement.</p>
<p>Therefore, citizens should continue to delegate policymaking entirely to their elected representatives on the assumption that the latter, being at the top of the political or policy tree, continue to see and know more, and faster.</p>
<p>This was definitely true in the 19th century, when the current system of representative democracy emerged. It might have been the case until two or three decades ago. But as information continues to become dispersed more widely and more quickly to everyone, those who continue to have a monopoly on national policymaking – our federal politicians, bureaucrats and peak group lobbyists – are now not in the right place to know consistently what is going on.</p>
<p>As a result, just like in the US, the UK and other major Western democracies organised around <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-end-of-representative-politics-41997">19th-century representative democracy</a>, ordinary citizens are increasingly judging so-called high politics as out of touch and contemptibly “low”.</p>
<p>Australia in the 19th century set new global benchmarks for democratic innovation, such as secret ballots and extending voting rights. These changes were all ground-breaking because they reconstituted politics and policymaking to respond better to new and fast-changing times.</p>
<p>Today we are at the same inflexion point in history. Australia’s national politicians again need to step up and lead the way on the inevitable process of national and global democratic innovation.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62828/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Triffitt is a member of the Academic Advisory Council of the newDemocacy Foundation.</span></em></p>Australia’s national politicians again need to step up and lead the way on the inevitable process of national and global democratic innovation.Mark Triffitt, Lecturer, Public Policy and Politics, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/610192016-08-07T20:09:31Z2016-08-07T20:09:31ZThe new Senate looms as a serious problem for a damaged Malcolm Turnbull<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/133194/original/image-20160805-466-1rcug2q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">We will get an early insight into the Turnbull government’s likely approach to dealing with the Senate crossbench.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and his Liberal colleagues have had a very poor election. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/final-senate-results-30-coalition-26-labor-9-greens-4-one-nation-3-nxt-4-others-63449">result in the Senate</a> only confirms just how bad the 2016 contest was for the Coalition. </p>
<p>One seat away from being in minority government, the returned Turnbull government can now add arguably one of the most diverse and potentially volatile senates ever elected in Australia to its list of political problems.</p>
<p>When the Senate finally convenes, the Coalition will hold 30 seats – nine short of the majority it would need to have legislation passed. Across the chamber will sit 26 Labor senators, nine Green senators and a further 11 crossbench senators from six different political parties. </p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-174" class="tc-infographic" height="800" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/174/550b3d30dff16f36bae4c36ecc1e3174a2ee92a2/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Upper house woes</h2>
<p>When Turnbull took over as prime minister, the government had to that point been struggling with a non-Green crossbench of nine. </p>
<p>So difficult had these senators become, Turnbull resorted to doing deals with the Greens on occasion to get some bills through. This included one to <a href="https://theconversation.com/senate-voting-changes-pass-so-how-do-we-elect-the-upper-house-now-55641">alter the Senate voting system</a> to do away with party tickets. Turnbull justified this as a reform that would assist in eradicating “micro” parties. </p>
<p>This reform has not delivered on its promise, although Turnbull contributed to its failure by calling a double-dissolution election and, in so doing, demonstrating yet again just how poor his political judgement can be. </p>
<p>One wonders if Liberal strategists planning the double dissolution foresaw that not only would Pauline Hanson <a href="https://theconversation.com/defiant-hanson-will-test-a-coalition-government-61985">return to the Australian parliament</a>, but that she would bring three fellow senators with her. </p>
<p>Turnbull’s upper house woes don’t stop there. There are now two more acolytes of Nick Xenophon in the Senate – and one in the lower house – and two of the micro-party senators who were the target of Turnbull’s changes to the voting system, Bob Day from Family First and David Leyonhjelm from the Liberal Democrats. They are back and presumably angry with the government for the way it treated them in the previous parliament.</p>
<p>With this phalanx of people from the social conservative and populist right arranged against it, the Coalition’s only alternative is to deal with the left – either Labor or the Greens. </p>
<p>Cynics might suggest this is an outcome that Turnbull might be comfortable with personally, but it is a fair bet the rest of the Coalition would not be so happy to deal with ideological enemies – especially on matters like climate change and same-sex marriage.</p>
<h2>How will the government deal with it?</h2>
<p>To conclude on the basis of this that the government might struggle to get its agenda through the Senate would be the political understatement of the year. </p>
<p>One way around the potential for the Senate to frustrate the government would be to try to minimise the amount of legislation going before it. It is unlikely this would appeal to Turnbull. </p>
<p>The alternatives to legislative minimalism are either seeking to make policy by trying to negotiate with all the different players in the upper house (and wearing the consequential compromises), or taking the Whitlamesque approach of being constantly defeated in the Senate and seeking to campaign against upper house obstructionism in the court of public opinion. </p>
<p>We will get an early insight into the government’s likely approach. The Constitution <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-happens-now-to-the-bills-that-triggered-the-double-dissolution-election-62345">gives Turnbull the option</a> of bringing the <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-are-the-abcc-and-registered-organisations-bills-56676">Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) bills</a> that triggered the double dissolution to a joint sitting of the parliament, if the Senate again rejects them. </p>
<p>What Turnbull does here will probably set the tone for the next three years. There are reports the government has been in dialogue already with the crossbench over the legislation – the subtext being that the ABCC bills might pass with substantial modifications to appease the concerns of the Xenophon bloc in particular. </p>
<p>This sort of bargaining would have to extend to all the other right-wing populists and social conservatives as well, given Labor and the Greens will surely not support these bills.</p>
<p>There is enormous scope for the government’s efforts to come to nothing and for the bills to be defeated at a joint sitting. This would be a very humiliating start to the new government cycle.</p>
<p>Each defeat in the upper house at the hands of the right-of-centre minor parties will be a humiliation of Turnbull and will undermine the impression he is trying to give that he is leading a moderate and mildly progressive government that can get things done. </p>
<p>Turnbull’s only recourse might be to ring up his recently acquired political ally, Greens leader Richard Di Natale, to see if his nine-person bloc might come to his aid. </p>
<p>This approach would incense the very large block of conservatives within the Coalition who are already angry with Turnbull for his abysmal election performance. This is the real danger for Turnbull. Senate defeats can be withstood, but humiliation at the hands of the joint partyroom could be fatal to his leadership.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/61019/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick Economou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The returned Turnbull government can now add arguably one of the most diverse and potentially volatile senates ever to be elected in Australia to its list of political problems.Nick Economou, Senior Lecturer, School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/635912016-08-05T07:28:03Z2016-08-05T07:28:03ZLatest PBO costings won’t hold any parties to account<p>While the Parliamentary Budget Office’s (PBO) <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Budget_Office/2016_post-election_report">2016 post-election report</a> represents a massive undertaking in time and effort, it won’t hold any political party to account, nor provide any additional transparency to the electoral process.</p>
<p>In 2013, then treasurer Wayne Swan announced that the PBO would provide full costings for all election promises made by political parties within <a href="http://ministers.treasury.gov.au/DisplayDocs.aspx?doc=speeches/2013/004.htm&pageID=003&min=wms&Year=&DocType=1">30 days of an election being held</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Transparency would be further enhanced if the PBO were to prepare a post-election audit of all political parties, publishing full costings of their election commitments and their budget bottom line 30 days after an election. This will remove the capacity of any political party to try to mislead the Australian people and punish those that do.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Who could possibly be against more transparency? Or opposed to holding political parties to account? No doubt Swan thought he was being clever. </p>
<p>Certainly he was hoping to cast the then opposition as being fiscally irresponsible. Swan would soon lose his position as treasurer, but the post-election audit lives on.</p>
<p>In one sense the fact that budgets and budgeting make up a large proportion of political debate is a good thing. Australians intuitively understand that underpinning a flourishing civil society is a sound economy. </p>
<p>To the extent that Australians are not as “relaxed and comfortable” as they were under John Howard, this is due to angst over the economy. The downside of the obsession with budgets and budgeting is that many Australians don’t have the time or inclination to explore the numbers in any detail.</p>
<p>The first problem with the PBO’s latest release is that the material is published after the election. By the 2019 election few voters will be interested in the PBO costings of the last election. </p>
<p>Policy tragics may well want to point to past mistakes, but overwhelmingly voters are forward-looking. After all, Labor was able to win the 2007 election after its 2004 costing disaster. The Coalition won in 2013 after its 2010 difficulties.</p>
<p>To avoid misleading the voters, this information needs to be available before the election. That, of course, is not practicable.</p>
<p>The second problem with the numbers is that they lack context and proportion. For example, we now “know” that the Greens policies would improve the budget bottom line by $8.2 billion over the forward estimates. </p>
<p>The Coalition’s policies improved the bottom line by a mere $1.1 billion, while Labor’s policies would have resulted in a $16.6 billion deterioration. We’re invited to believe that anyone concerned about debt and deficit should vote for the Greens. Well, maybe not. </p>
<p>The Greens proposed tax increases of some $104.9 billion and increased spending of a mere $96.4 billion. There are several problems here. First, it beggars belief that an additional $100 billion of tax revenue could be extracted from the economy with no adverse effects. </p>
<p>For example, the Greens would abolish accelerated depreciation for aircraft, the oil and gas industry and motor vehicles. The costing assumes “there is no change to the overall level or timing of investment as a result of this proposal”. But how plausible is that assumption? This is a general problem with all political budgeting in Australia – the costings simply determine if the numbers are correctly calculated, not whether the policy is plausible or even sensible. </p>
<p>Costing methodology does not investigate the broader macroeconomic consequences of policy proposals. To be sure, there are good reasons for this oversight, but it is a serious limitation of the usefulness of these costing exercises.</p>
<p>Then there is an implementation problem. Pre-election policies are simply a wish-list. There is no point in holding parties to account for pre-election wish-lists when actual policy outcomes are determined by the election itself. </p>
<p>In 2010, Julia Gillard had to promise there would be no carbon tax under her government. Yet after the election, in order to actually form government, she had to break that promise. </p>
<p>Similarly, who would have expected four One Nation senators after the recent election? The costs of any policy will be determined by the horse-trading necessary to pass legislation through the parliament.</p>
<p>To be clear, the ability to undertake plausible and sensible policy costings and prepare coherent budgets is an important part of winning office. Yet those numbers need to be placed in a broader framework and narrative, which is lacking in the PBO report.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/63591/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sinclair Davidson has received funding from the Australian Research Council. He is a senior research fellow with the Institute of Public Affairs and an academic fellow at the Australian Taxpayers' Alliance. </span></em></p>The 2016 post-election report from the Parliamentary Budget Office lacks context and comes too late to inform voters.Sinclair Davidson, Professor of Institutional Economics, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/633072016-08-05T04:37:13Z2016-08-05T04:37:13ZSo, how did the new Senate voting rules work in practice?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/133185/original/image-20160805-501-k16skc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">In March, the government passed sweeping changes to the way Australians elect their senators.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Australia has its <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-whos-who-on-the-new-senate-crossbench-62216">new Senate</a>. The Coalition will hold 30 seats, Labor 26, the Greens nine, and there will be 11 other crossbench senators.</p>
<p>In March, the government passed <a href="https://theconversation.com/senate-voting-changes-pass-so-how-do-we-elect-the-upper-house-now-55641">sweeping changes</a> to the way Australians elect their senators. <a href="http://www.prsa.org.au/history.htm#gvt">Group voting tickets</a>, whereby voting “1” above the line meant your preferences were those already lodged by the party you voted “1” for, were abolished. This returned control of preferences to individual voters.</p>
<p>When debating the changes, which Labor and other minor and micro parties opposed, some senators made predictions about the make-up of the new upper house. Labor’s <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22chamber%2Fhansards%2F120cdb07-6373-4ce4-8fe5-c2c4cfd5c68c%2F0037%22">Jacinta Collins</a> said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The principal beneficiary of this new voting system will be the Liberal Party … The Liberal Party’s true motivation is to achieve lasting electoral dominance in the Senate for the conservative parties and, over time, a lasting Senate majority in its own right.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In fact, at the 2016 election the Coalition lost a net three Senate positions. It now has its lowest level of representation in the upper house in 70 years.</p>
<p>In February, Labor senator <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2016/s4412096.htm">Stephen Conroy</a> said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The stated aim of these reforms is to wipe out all of the minor party players. On everybody’s calculations, they’ll all be replaced by either a Liberal coalition, a Green or a Labor senator.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In fact, the number of non-Green crossbench senators has increased from eight to 11.</p>
<p>Conroy <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2016/s4412096.htm">also said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… over three million Australians’ votes will be discarded. They’ll be exhausted; they’ll be not used to calculate who’s actually going to get into the Senate.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In other words, Conroy claimed more than 20% of Australians would vote and preference candidates who would be excluded before the Senate count was completed. In fact, the incidence of exhausted ballots was less than 6%, not including exhaustions from the last defeated candidate. In other words, over 94% of votes were cast either for elected candidates or the one last defeated candidate.</p>
<p>The new Senate is representative of the wide range of views in Australia – and far more so than the House of Representatives, as the table below indicates:</p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/IIbXa/1/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="550"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>The 18.7% of people who voted for “Others” includes many supporters of small parties who preferenced larger parties ahead of other parties. An example would be a supporter of the Arts Party who preferenced one of the major parties ahead of a party like the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers. It was never the case that all who voted for the smaller parties would preference another smaller party candidate ahead of any of the major parties.</p>
<p>After the final Senate results were declared, Labor leader Bill Shorten <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-04/final-senate-make-up-confirmed-with-11-crossbenchers/7689788">said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The presence in such numbers of One Nation in the Senate is a direct result of Mr Turnbull and Mr Di Natale’s action in terms of their so-called electoral reform. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>There is no evidence that this is so. Pauline Hanson would have been elected under the previous electoral rules; she received more than one quota. The presence of other senators from her party is due to large numbers of people voting for, and giving preferences to, One Nation. </p>
<p>And, under the previous system, One Nation senators may well have been elected because other smaller parties may have preferenced One Nation ahead of other parties.</p>
<p>The vast majority of voters are represented in the Senate by someone they voted for, or directed their preferences to. The table below shows the percentage of votes that contributed to the election of senators in each of the six states:</p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Upiol/4/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="600"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>This table is based at the stage when just one defeated candidate remained in the count: this is the fairest way of calculating these figures.</p>
<p>An even higher percentage of ballots contributed to the election of senators. This is because when a candidate is elected, the votes not needed for their election – the “surplus” – are transferred to the candidate next preferred by the voter, but at a lower vote value (the <a href="http://www.prsa.org.au/gregoryj.htm">transfer value</a>).</p>
<p>In South Australia, for example, 269,824 people voted for the ALP above the line and those preferences ended up with the unsuccessful fourth Labor candidate, Anne McEwen. Around 86% of the value of each vote cast for Labor above the line counted to elect the first three candidates, but the remaining 14% of the value of those votes ended up with the unsuccessful last candidate.</p>
<p>Under the previous Senate voting system, all preferences had to be expressed below the line. This meant that, in each of the six states, all 12 senators elected would have a full quota of votes, and at least 12/13 (92.31%) of the votes would contribute to the election of a senator. </p>
<p>So, how did it work this time? Overall, 90.02% of the votes contributed to the election of senators. The difference between that and the 92.31% figure cited above is the extent of exhaustion.</p>
<p>What is exhaustion? Suppose a Tasmanian voted for the following six parties, then left the rest of the ballot paper blank.</p>
<p>1 Citizens Electoral Council</p>
<p>2 Arts Party</p>
<p>3 Voteflux</p>
<p>4 Australian Liberty Alliance</p>
<p>5 Science Party</p>
<p>6 Renewable Energy Party</p>
<p>The candidates for those parties all received few votes and were all excluded from the count early, meaning this Tasmanian voter’s ballot became exhausted, as it indicated no further preferences and thus could not further influence the result.</p>
<p>Much more typically, exhausted ballots come at the end of the count. In Tasmania, for example, 29.5% of all the exhausted ballots were from the surplus of Liberal candidate David Bushby. At the point in the count when his surplus was distributed, three candidates remained: Catryna Bilyk (Labor), Nick McKim (Greens) and Kate McCulloch (One Nation). The value of Bushby’s suplus was distributed as follows:</p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Wqa8h/2/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="380"></iframe>
<hr>
<p>Surely it is no surprise that 2,816 of those Liberal supporters had no desire to support any of the three remaining candidates. Voters made deliberate choices either to express preferences or not, according to what they believe.</p>
<p>Another important feature of this Senate election, which has not happened for at least 60 years, was the election of a candidate out of order on their party’s ticket. Despite being listed sixth, Labor’s Lisa Singh was elected ahead of the fourth candidate down the column, Catryna Bilyk. The fifth candidate on the ticket, John Short, was unsuccessful. That happened because 26.8% of Labor voters marked their votes below the line, and 18.2% of those gave their first preference to Singh.</p>
<p>The concerns raised about the changes to the Senate system, and the predictions of loss of representation, did not eventuate. Rather, the new system has worked to produce a house of parliament much more representative of the range and balance of Australians’ political views than the House of Representatives.</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-193" class="tc-infographic" height="800" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/193/ad552b7bc32776436af08ccde38e8f64f716ba81/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/63307/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephen Morey is the National Secretary of the Proportional Representation Society of Australia. He is a recipient of an Australian Research Council grant, but not for research related to this article,</span></em></p>The new Senate is representative of the wide range of views in Australia – and far more so than the House of Representatives.Stephen Morey, Senior Lecturer, Department of Languages and Linguistics, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/622162016-08-04T23:57:38Z2016-08-04T23:57:38ZExplainer: who’s who on the new Senate crossbench?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/133181/original/image-20160804-473-1bgqe9v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Like the proverbial phoenix, One Nation has again risen in Australian politics.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Dan Peled</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The 2016 federal election has finally come to an end, with the Australian Electoral Commission declaring who will sit in the <a href="http://vtr.aec.gov.au/SenateStatePage-20499-NSW.htm">next Senate</a>. The results suggest the Turnbull government will have to master the art of negotiation if it is to implement its policies.</p>
<h2>New system, new Senate</h2>
<p>As this was a <a href="https://theconversation.com/election-explainer-what-does-it-mean-that-were-having-a-double-dissolution-election-56671">double-dissolution election</a>, the quota for election was halved, making it easier for candidates to win Senate seats.</p>
<p>The Senate is made up of 76 seats (12 from each state and two from each territory). The government must gain the support of at least 39 senators to pass its legislation.</p>
<p>The Coalition has 30 seats; Labor holds 26; there will be nine Greens. There are now 11 other crossbench senators from six different parties. The Turnbull government will therefore need the support of at least nine non-Green votes from the crossbench if Labor and the Greens oppose its legislation.</p>
<p>The 2016 election used a <a href="https://theconversation.com/senate-voting-changes-pass-so-how-do-we-elect-the-upper-house-now-55641">new system of voting</a> for the Senate. The group voting ticket (GVT) was abolished, and voters were able to more directly send their preferences to their favoured candidates. This had a significant impact on the re-emergence of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation.</p>
<p>In 1998, when the then-nascent party enjoyed relatively high levels of support, the major parties preferenced One Nation last. But, as the Senate had changed its voting system, One Nation in 2016 was no longer dependent on preference deals to the same extent and now returns to the federal parliament.</p>
<p>So, who’s who on the new Senate crossbench? And what role will they play in the 45th parliament?</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-177" class="tc-infographic" height="800" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/177/e290adbeb68398ff8b685c33a03f302d82a9e384/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>The Greens</h2>
<p>The Greens lost one seat but continue to hold the largest bloc on the crossbench, with nine seats. The government may pass its legislation if it can get the Greens’ support.</p>
<p>This will be a challenge, however. The Greens will continue to advance a policy agenda that covers broad conservation and socially progressive aims.</p>
<p>While such views appear to be shared to some extent with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, there may be flashpoints on social policy in particular. This may depend on how much influence the Coalition’s conservative element has on proposed legislation.</p>
<p>The Greens may be a very important ally to the government, but they will not be supporting legislation that conflicts with their agenda.</p>
<p>Then again, the Greens will face some challenges of their own. Losing one seat and associated parliamentary resources means the party will be focusing on preparing to consolidate and expand in the Senate at the next election.</p>
<h2>The Nick Xenophon Team</h2>
<p>A big winner of this election is Nick Xenophon and his new political party, which claimed three Senate seats.</p>
<p>The Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) has a mix of protectionist economic and socially progressive policies. Part of its appeal has been its focus on enhancing government accountability and promoting manufacturing in Australia.</p>
<p>While Xenophon himself has been vocal on these topics, as well as his long-term concern about predatory gambling, the challenge will now be to make a legislative impact in these areas. If voters get a sense that his party has been unable to fulfil its promises, they may choose to give their votes to someone else next time.</p>
<h2>The Jacqui Lambie Network</h2>
<p>Jacqui Lambie, who was elected in 2013 as a Palmer United Party candidate in Tasmania, also created a new party and will be returning to the Senate.</p>
<p>Presenting herself as a strong advocate for her state, Lambie built a high public profile by positioning herself as an anti-establishment figure. </p>
<p>Concerns about protecting jobs and the provision of government services dominated her campaign, as did <a href="http://lambienetwork.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/LAMBIE-NETWORK-POLICY.pdf">her opposition to sharia law</a> supposedly being imposed in Australia.</p>
<h2>Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party</h2>
<p>Derryn Hinch will be in the Senate representing Victoria. He has a high public profile as a controversial journalist and will advocate for reforms to a suite of law-and-order issues.</p>
<p>Hinch has for many years called for a public register of convicted sex offenders. His party also seeks to reform matters concerning sentencing and parole, as well as domestic violence.</p>
<p>The party is also in favour of voluntary euthanasia. This spread of policies will allow Hinch to transcend any sense of rigid party politics in the Senate.</p>
<h2>Pauline Hanson’s One Nation</h2>
<p>Like the proverbial phoenix, One Nation has risen again in Australian politics.</p>
<p>Pauline Hanson, who became a prominent figure when she was first elected to the lower house in 1996, will lead her reinvigorated party back into the Senate after winning the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/results/senate/#sqld">third-highest primary vote</a> in Queensland after the Liberal National Party and the Labor Party.</p>
<p>Presenting herself as an anti-establishment figure, Hanson won support from some sections of the electorate for her concerns about race and migration. She also promotes a broadly protectionist suite of economic policies.</p>
<p>The One Nation party of 2016 has also expressed greater concern about religion and climate change than it did in the 1990s.</p>
<p>The party <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-10/timeline-rise-of-pauline-hanson-one-nation/7583230">famously imploded</a> when it had just one senator from 1998 to 2004. Hanson’s challenge will be to keep a cohesive group together and avoid recreating past disunity.</p>
<p>Hanson has already flagged that her party’s senators are free to vote against the party when they see fit, making negotiations for the government even more complicated. It will not be able to count on the party to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-04/final-senate-make-up-confirmed-with-11-crossbenchers/7689788">vote as a bloc</a>.</p>
<h2>The returnees</h2>
<p>Bob Day will return to the Senate representing Family First. His party advances socially conservative policies, including a desire to ensure <a href="http://www.sa-familyfirst.org.au/marriage/">same-sex marriage</a> does not become a reality in Australia. </p>
<p>Maintaining the idea that a nuclear family is best, as well as opposing liberal social policies, will be at the core of Family First’s focus.</p>
<p>Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm will return to pursue policies that limit government power. As a libertarian, Leyonhjelm will oscillate from being friend and foe for the government. His <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/18/david-leyonhjelm-is-neither-a-champion-nor-a-villain-hes-a-libertarian">reported opposition</a> to some government services may be in line with the Coalition’s. But his support for legalising same-sex marriage will be troublesome for some in the government.</p>
<h2>The Turnbull government and the new Senate</h2>
<p>The double-dissolution election has injected into the Senate a wider range of parties and policy demands than before. The government will need to have strong working relationships with the crossbench to have any chance of getting their support.</p>
<p>Policy that is seen to be ideologically driven will have little prospect of passing. Major reforms will need much careful negotiation and an acceptance that compromise will be inevitable.</p>
<p>The composition of the Senate means the government’s team, especially Senate leader George Brandis, will have to work extremely hard to negotiate their way through the disparate policy demands.</p>
<p>Turnbull, vaunted as a <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/chris-kenny/election-2016-malcolm-turnbulls-qa-appearance-his-best-campaign-performance/news-story/5a6c92ea277f494b8aeb6647396381b8">great communicator</a>, will also have to be a consistent top performer if his government’s policies are to get through the Senate.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62216/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Zareh Ghazarian does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Senate results suggest the Turnbull government will have to master the art of negotiation if it is to implement its policies.Zareh Ghazarian, Lecturer, School of Social Sciences, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/635522016-08-04T12:17:55Z2016-08-04T12:17:55ZGrattan on Friday: Twenty years on, the Perils of Pauline haunt another Liberal leader<p>The election for the Senate hasn’t ended well. To have four senators from One Nation in the upper house is worse than unfortunate.</p>
<p>If Malcolm Turnbull had not called a double dissolution, but settled for a normal half-Senate election, Pauline Hanson would probably have been elected but not with three other One Nation candidates.</p>
<p>The potential sway of the Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) received much attention before the election but it has secured one less Senate place than Hanson’s group, which emerged as the big winners when the final Senate results were announced on Thursday.</p>
<p>The Senate outcome is Coalition 30, Labor 26, Greens nine, One Nation four, NXT three, Liberal Democrat one, Family First one, Jacqui Lambie, and Derryn Hinch. The number of non-Green crossbenchers is 11, compared with the eight previously, with the government requiring nine to pass bills opposed by Labor and the Greens.</p>
<p>Turnbull has absorbed the lesson that the Abbott government did not master – the need to try to strike meaningful relationships with the crossbenchers from the start.</p>
<p>When he became leader Turnbull reached out to the then crossbench but there was not adequate follow-through – that was the senators’ story, anyway.</p>
<p>Now a good deal of preparation is being done. Turnbull has been in touch with a number of the crossbench senators, including meeting Hanson. David Bold, until recently in change of Turnbull’s media team, has a fresh assignment. He’ll head a new group of three or four within the Prime Minister’s Office that will liaise with the crossbench and the government backbench. </p>
<p>Bold’s own focus will be on the crossbench senators who will determine how much of the contested parts of the Coalition’s program gets through.</p>
<p>Government Senate leader George Brandis predicts the new crossbench could be “somewhat easier to deal with” than its predecessor. Certainly it will not receive quite the provocation that one did – we won’t be seeing another budget like 2014’s.</p>
<p>Immediately after the election, it was thought the government would have no hope of getting passed the industrial relations bills used to trigger the double dissolution – these would resurrect the Australian Building and Construction Commission and toughen union governance.</p>
<p>Now it is expected the numbers are there for them to get through a joint sitting. But they may even pass the Senate, with some amendments, making the joint sitting unnecessary.</p>
<p>The government judges the new non-Green crossbenchers as being, overall, more conservative-leaning than the last lot; it also thinks things will be simpler when there are two blocs.</p>
<p>There’s precedent for the very occasional deal with the Greens. But when Labor and the Greens team up to oppose legislation, the Coalition will need support from NXT and One Nation senators. </p>
<p>If each bloc stays together and both blocs back a measure, the Coalition requires two more votes. Family First’s Bob Day is sympathetic, and Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm – though presently angry at Liberal attacks on his party – should often be winnable.</p>
<p>Then there’s Hinch. In one of those exquisite twists of politics, Hinch’s adviser is Glenn Druery, famous as the “preference whisperer”. It was Druery’s “whispering” that wrangled the Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party’s Ricky Muir a seat at the 2013 election. </p>
<p>The government and Greens combined to bring in a new voting system to thwart the “whisperer”, although its effect of squeezing minor players was offset by having a double dissolution. Druery says his advice to Hinch is: “work with the government where possible, but don’t do anything for free”.</p>
<p>The Senate situation clearly delivers a great deal of power to Xenophon and Hanson, both of them populist and protectionist, though in other ways hugely different.</p>
<p>Xenophon is the experienced negotiator and networker, used to the subtleties of the Senate game. In policy terms he is especially concerned about the embattled manufacturing sector. </p>
<p>He is also focused on his home state of South Australia – this will be reinforced by his team (there is a fourth in the lower house) all being elected from that state. Unlike Hanson with senators from three states, Xenophon – despite his earlier aspirations – wasn’t able to plant a national footprint at the election.</p>
<p>Hanson in this new setting is an unknown quantity. Parliament gives her a platform but also, for the first time, the opportunity for a seat at the table.</p>
<p>Her comments suggest she has been chuffed by the government going out of its way to show a pleasant face to her. “He was very gracious,” she said after a meeting with Turnbull, especially, no doubt, as “I did most of the talking”.</p>
<p>When she entered parliament as member for Oxley in 1996, recently disendorsed by the Liberal Party, Hanson became an extraordinarily powerful disruptive force in Australian politics, with severe fallout for John Howard.</p>
<p>This time, will she remain the outsider, using parliament as a soap box, or will she seek to be more of the insider in that place of complex dynamics, the Senate?</p>
<p>And how will Labor handle her? The ALP finds the Hansonites extremely distasteful politically, but it can hardly ignore a bloc of four. Someone in Labor will eventually have to put the kettle on, literally or figuratively. If they don’t, the ALP will be handing the government a useful break.</p>
<p>Hanson has got the jackpot at the election but she faces her own nightmare. This party is slack on unity and discipline and big on individuals with strongly held opinions, including some divisive, offensive and downright wacky ones.</p>
<p>While ultimately Hanson’s power depends on her being able to deliver a bloc, in fact the Hansonites are likely to split on particular votes. The One Nation team could end up the same way as the Palmer United Party, which saw two of its three senators become independents.</p>
<p>Thanks to Turnbull, the Hansonites, together and individually, are set to be a signature story of this parliament.</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-211" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/211/e986084e62ac97aa73fbb1a44f93029ce782668a/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/ce8vs-6175ee?from=yiiadmin" data-link="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/ce8vs-6175ee?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/63552/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The election for the Senate hasn’t ended well. To have four senators from One Nation in the upper house is worse than unfortunate.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/628332016-07-22T01:36:53Z2016-07-22T01:36:53ZWhat we really need from innovation in Australia<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/131529/original/image-20160722-4217-1btrgat.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The need for innovation, but what does it mean?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/thomashawk/185472365/">Thomas Hawk/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The tone of commentary about the appropriateness and effectiveness of innovation as a centrepiece of Australian government policy has turned from one of enthusiasm, particularly among the start-up community, to pessimism and even rejection.</p>
<p>Just a day after the federal election, it had <a href="http://www.innovationaus.com/2016/07/Winners-losers-in-a-tough-game">already been pointed out</a> that innovation politics had paid out some harsh lessons for the Coalition. The issue was not only <a href="http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/wyatt-roy-has-finally-conceded-the-seat-of-longman/3058968/">the loss of Wyatt Roy</a>, the assistant minister for innovation, but the electorate appearing unreceptive to the prime minister Malcolm Turnbull’s “<a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-seeks-ideas-boom-with-innovation-agenda-experts-react-51892">ideas boom</a>” mantra.</p>
<p>It seems the message of an exciting future through innovation and high-tech start-ups has palpably failed to engage the Australian community.</p>
<p>Should we be surprised? Did innovation ever have sufficient potency or reach as a concept to transform the Australian economy? </p>
<h2>The need for innovation</h2>
<p>First, it is important to reiterate that the many arguments made over the years, and myriad research findings, emphatically support the role of innovation in the modern economy.</p>
<p>The globally competitive nature of the modern economy requires companies to continually improve their products, services and business processes if they are to survive. </p>
<p>Innovation makes immediate sense in the corporate environment because of this competitive pressure. Doing the same thing over again just invites imitation and displacement.</p>
<p>Not that producing and managing innovation is easy. By its very simple definition of “doing new and better things”, innovation does not lend itself easily to rule-based procedures. </p>
<p>Innovation is inherently rule-breaking. Hence the myriad top ten tips for innovation are almost invariably pointless. If you are following someone else’s rules, you are not innovating.</p>
<p>At a national level, establishing effective and enduring systems of research, development, engagement and commercialisation remains a significant challenge.</p>
<p>This is shown not only by Australia’s relatively poor performance in international comparative measures of <a href="https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2015-report#">innovation performance</a>, and the fact that it’s last out of the 34 OECD members for <a href="http://www.industry.gov.au/Office-of-the-Chief-Economist/Publications/Documents/Australian-Innovation-System/Australian-Innovation-System-Report-2015.pdf">economic complexity</a>, but also by the high level of analysis and policy reform in countries that outperform Australia.</p>
<h2>What inspires innovation?</h2>
<p>The lessons we have learnt is that innovation arises from an uncertain combination of creative minds, space to experiment and fail, modest financial support, a supportive environment, passion and risk-taking, in relatively small portions.</p>
<p>The current intense activity and hype in the start-up space is less about creating a new generation of billionaires, and more about realising a new, intensive approach to the pursuit and capture of innovation.</p>
<p>But when we move into the policy context, and even more importantly the political context, the meaning and role of innovation becomes far more problematic. The American astronomer Carl Sagan <a href="http://www.csicop.org/si/show/why_we_need_to_understand_science">said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We’ve arranged a society on science and technology in which nobody understands anything about science and technology […]</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I would paraphrase this to say we live in a society exquisitely dependent on innovation, in which hardly anyone knows anything about innovation.</p>
<p>Innovation is such a loose, umbrella concept that it can mean many different things to different people. More significantly, innovation is only ever a means to an end. New products, jobs, economic growth, profitability are what we want from innovation.</p>
<p>But too often innovation is treated as an end in its own right, implying that if we only change something – anything – life will be better. It reminds me of the possibly apocryphal manager demanding of his staff that they increase their innovation production rate from two to three and a half per week – “just get out there and innovate!”</p>
<h2>What the public want</h2>
<p>What do we know of public attitudes to innovation? Reliable opinion poll data are scarce. </p>
<p>But if we draw on politicians, whose central survival skill is understanding people’s interests and concerns, we find Ed Husic, Labor’s innovation spokesman <a href="http://www.innovationaus.com/2016/07/Winners-losers-in-a-tough-game">who said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If I went and had this (innovation policy) debate in the Mt Druitt library I don’t think many people would get what we are talking about. A lot of those people think what you do and what we argue for is a job killer […]</p>
<p>The other issue that is contentious is whether technology is only going to make rich people richer. Is it only going to accumulate benefits to one portion of society that is already doing well?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>All the positive arguments about the need to transition from a resources-based to a knowledge economy (not that the two are mutually exclusive) will require a much broader framing than facilitating start-ups and venture capital investment.</p>
<p>It involves a profound reshaping of the understanding of what is and will be the nature of a job, what skills are necessary to be able to get that job or deliver that service, and how that provides the basis for the desired life quality. A much larger narrative is waiting to be written.</p>
<p>Throughout history, there have always been winners and losers in times of great change. At least some of our commitment to innovation needs to be in finding new ways to ease economic, social and psychological transitions</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62833/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ron Johnston does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The message of an exciting future through innovation and high-tech start-ups has failed to engage the Australian community.Ron Johnston, Executive Director, Australian Centre for Innovation, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/626172016-07-21T20:06:18Z2016-07-21T20:06:18ZInner-city bias: the suburbs need a fair go<p>One of the startling facts about the Brexit vote was the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-geography-of-brexit-what-the-vote-reveals-about-the-disunited-kingdom-61633">deep division</a> between the city of London and the rest of the country. There was clearly a sense that change was working to the advantage of the urban elites, and often to the detriment of people who lived outside those privileged areas. </p>
<p>The recent Australian election <a href="https://theconversation.com/state-of-the-states-what-were-the-issues-and-seats-that-mattered-in-australias-state-and-territories-61429">reveals some of the same division</a> but within the major cities rather than between city and the regions. Inner-city areas <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/why-the-housing-bubble-spells-big-trouble-for-labor-20160718-gq86wd.html">voted quite differently to the suburbs</a>.</p>
<p>The fight over Melbourne’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-18/government-adamant-on-east-west-link-revival-/7426330">East-West Link</a> road project played out in those terms. The plan was heavily opposed by inner-city residents who had access to good public transport (trams, trains, buses, bicycles etc) and supported by residents of the suburbs who wanted improved cross-city road transport. The inner-city elite won.</p>
<p>We now have a similar but more egregious case evolving in Melbourne. The state government is supporting the construction of a project called the <a href="http://westerndistributorproject.vic.gov.au/">Western Distributor</a>. It is basically a plan to improve the flow of goods in and out of the Port of Melbourne (which is in the CBD). This provides a significant benefit to the people of the western suburbs – that is, to the <a href="http://k46cs13u1432b9asz49wnhcx.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/themes/dote2015/resources/melbourne.pdf">poorer half of the city</a>.</p>
<p>There are two advantages to the city’s west. It will dramatically reduce the number of trucks passing along suburban streets and it will reduce travel times from the west to the north of the city. The <a href="http://economicdevelopment.vic.gov.au/transport/major-projects/western-distributor">government’s evaluation</a> is that it will:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… take 22,000 vehicles including 6,000 trucks off the West Gate Bridge daily, remove up to 6,000 trucks from local streets in the inner west, improving amenity, air quality and safety … [and] reduce serious injury crashes by 20%.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3D_TxjF_rwI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The Victorian government promotes the benefits of the Western Distributor Project.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There is also a broad economic advantage to Victoria as a result of better logistics flows. Melbourne is a major container port and improvements to the movement of freight produce advantages for all Victorians: the project will “cut travel time to the port by up to 50%, and deliver an annual A$35 million saving to the freight industry”.</p>
<h2>Opposition based on self-interest</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/melbourne-city-council-set-to-oppose-55-billion-western-distributor-toll-road-20160714-gq5zn7.html">inner city is opposed</a> to the project. The grounds put forward are revealing. City of Melbourne Greens councillor <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/western-distributor-threatens-melbournes-status-as-most-liveable-city-councillor-warns/news-story/1030d985caae1ee92e80916f019a3f6e">Cathy Oke said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>No city in the world is encouraging cars into the CBD so I can’t see how this project is a winner for our liveability status.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The state Greens MP for inner-city Melbourne, Ellen Sandell, <a href="http://www.ellensandell.com/western_distributor">makes the same argument</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>No modern, global city is trying to bring more cars into its CBD. We should be investing even more in public transport, cycling and pedestrian infrastructure and ways to get trucks off streets in the west – not new freeways that bring cars into the city.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These are clearly selfish propositions. Inner-city residents do not want any more cars in the city regardless of the benefits that might accrue to other residents of Melbourne, and regardless of any broader economic benefits for the city and the state. The fact that the people of the west <a href="http://k46cs13u1432b9asz49wnhcx.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/themes/dote2015/resources/melbourne.pdf">are poorer</a>, have <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/warning-not-to-let-transurban-toll-road-crowd-out-tram-plan-for-west-20160718-gq88eg.html">worse public transport</a>, <a href="https://www.rdv.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/1195718/BHCMW-final-report.pdf">worse health outcomes</a> and <a href="http://lmip.gov.au/default.aspx?LMIP/LFR_SAFOUR/VIC_LFR_LM_byLFR_UnemploymentRate">high levels of unemployment</a>, is seen as unimportant. </p>
<h2>A recipe for social divisions</h2>
<p>These are the sort of elite positions that created Brexit and the broader political unhappiness in Europe and the US. If the inner-city residents are going to be this selfish, then we can expect to see some political response from the suburbs.</p>
<p>The inner city is spoilt. Inner-city residents have <a href="http://ptv.vic.gov.au/tickets/zones/#FTZ">free trams in Melbourne</a>, paid for by people in the suburbs. Inner-city residents have all of the Melbourne arts precincts and all of the cultural venues, also all subsidised by people in the suburbs. The inner city also has all of the major sporting venues, again all subsidised by the suburbs.</p>
<p>If we are to avoid the rise of populist concerns seen in other countries, the inner-city elite need to change its attitude. Rather than dividing the society by rejecting change that might hurt rich inner-city dwellers a little but provide substantial benefits for the rest of the city, these sorts of changes need to be considered fairly and discussed reasonably. </p>
<p>Residents in inner-city Melbourne (and inner-city Sydney and Brisbane too) have <a href="http://lmip.gov.au/default.aspx?LMIP/LFR_SAFOUR/VIC_LFR_LM_byLFR_UnemploymentRate">lower unemployment</a>, <a href="http://thefingeronthepulse.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/the-demography-of-employment-part-3.html">higher pay</a> and much better cultural amenity than people in the suburbs. Fairness requires some change and better support for the poorer parts of the city, not the richer parts.</p>
<p>Governments need to respond too by reducing the subsidies to the inner city. Even some clearer presentation of the state budgets to separate out the impact of spending on a geographical basis would help. Let us start spreading the benefits more widely.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62617/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rodney Maddock is a director of the Committee for Economic Development of Australia.</span></em></p>It’s a project that creates benefits for Melbourne’s western suburbs and the state as a whole. But the inner-city elite don’t like it and recent experience suggests their opinion holds sway.Rodney Maddock, Vice Chancellor's Fellow at Victoria University and Adjunct Professor of Economics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/627762016-07-20T05:59:37Z2016-07-20T05:59:37ZLessons from the election<p>The major parties seem to be having considerable difficulty drawing lessons from the recent election campaign. Of course, there are many. The most obvious, but probably the most difficult for them to accept, is that the electorate has lost confidence and trust in them, and in the political process.</p>
<p>Basically, the electorate is sick and tired of the misrepresentation, in some cases straight out lies, they are told, to the point that they now mostly don’t believe what is said or promised. They are sick and tired of the self-absorption. </p>
<p>They are sick and tired of the games played, at the expense of good government. Many feel isolated, disillusioned, and disenfranchised in and by the political process.</p>
<p>They are offended that the “end game” of politics has become “winning” the game itself, especially in the media. That politics has become increasingly short-term, opportunist, mostly negative, and sometimes very personal, where many of the principal players have never held down a “real job”, in the “real world” outside of politic, but some end up managing very large portfolios. </p>
<p>That they don’t listen to their concerns about, or even attempt to understand, the issues and challenges that matter to so many average Australians in the struggle that is their daily lives.</p>
<p>The clear lesson is the need to clean up politics, to re-establish the end game as good government, solving problems and creating opportunities, from both an individual and a national perspective.</p>
<p>This calls for leadership and action on many fronts. To begin, impose the same rules and standards of behaviour on politicians as imposed on the rest of us, all across society – for example, impose “truth in advertising” standards on political advertisements, and set and enforce standards in relation to “false and misleading conduct” by our politicians and officials. </p>
<p>For example, as in the corporate sector, where company directors are required to meet standards for “continuous disclosure” of material facts and events, and can be held to account for misrepresentation. There is also a need to ensure that similar penalties are publicised and enforced.</p>
<p>Second, clean up election campaign funding and lobbying. At the very least, political donations should be limited to individuals, and capped at say $1000, with all other donations and financial support from business, unions and other organisations and entities made illegal. </p>
<p>Details of individual donations should also be made public, immediately they are received, perhaps on line. If this can’t be made to work then, reluctantly, we should go to full public funding of elections, with all other donations and financial support banned.</p>
<p>While it is the essence of our democracy that we can express our views and needs to our politicians and government officials, and to seek their support and to influence the development of policy, lobbying needs to be fully transparent and publicly accountable. It is important that the public is informed about who they meet, when, in what circumstances, and on what issues. </p>
<p>The public has every right to be concerned about the objectionable influence of vested interests in recent years, evident right across all three levels of government. It occurred in planning outcomes, mining, café, and other leases, and in relation to issues such as the mining and carbon taxes, to cite just a few examples. </p>
<p>While details of various meetings with politicians and officials can be made transparent, enforcement of standards will probably require a national independent commission against corruption.</p>
<p>Third, it will be fundamentally important to clean up the parliament and parliamentary processes. This process could begin with a truly independent Speaker, even possibly as a professional appointment.</p>
<p>As Question Time is key to public perceptions, it too should be cleaned up – say, with all questions directed by the opposition and independents to government ministers. No more Dorothy Dixers and with all answers limited to say two minutes. No ministerial statements in response, as there are other provisions in the Standing Orders for these. I would also like a requirement that ministers have to answer without notes, in the belief that they should be sufficiently on top of their jobs to do so.</p>
<p>The processes of parliamentary committees should be further developed and empowered to review all legislation and initiate reviews and inquiries on key issues and events. It should also be possible to dramatically improve the quality of parliamentary debate, far above what has become little more than the parroting of their focus group-driven slogans aimed to confine the debate to their desired “message”.</p>
<p>The bureaucracy and other “officials” also have an important role to play, moving back to giving “full, fearless, and independent” advice, rather than seeing themselves too as players in the game, as many have done. They are more inclined to tell ministers what they think they want to hear, rather than what they ought to hear, or worse, attempting to second-guess the political game by advising “what they think that they can get up”.</p>
<p>With vote collection and counting becoming an annoying, unedifying farce, consideration should be given to more electronic voting, and to the more effective application of technology. Many have commented that we can eat, travel, bank, and be entertained, and much more, but not vote, on our mobile phone, or laptop?</p>
<p>Finally, the media too has to clean itself up. Many now see themselves as players in the game, in some cases kingmakers when it comes to leadership, or personality contests. Others run agendas on particular policy issues and challenges. Objectivity and genuine news has been generally replaced by byline pieces that are much more about recording their opinions than on reporting and analysing the facts.</p>
<p>All this, and much more, will be required to significantly improve the standing of our politicians and our political processes. The simple lesson of the last election is that the electorate is rapidly giving up, with some one in four now voting for a minor party or independent.</p>
<p>It can and should be fixed but I’m sure, drawing on The Castle, I will be told I am just “dreaming”!</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62776/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<h4 class="border">Disclosure</h4><p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Hewson is chair of the Asset Owners Disclosure Project, and was federal leader of the Liberal Party from 1990 to 1994.</span></em></p>The major parties seem to be having considerable difficulty drawing lessons from the recent election campaign. Of course, there are many. The most obvious, but probably the most difficult for them to accept…John Hewson, Professor and Chair, Tax and Transfer Policy Institute, Crawford School, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/624362016-07-19T03:00:03Z2016-07-19T03:00:03ZIs the new Senate vote capture system as risky as electronic voting?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/130815/original/image-20160718-2138-czdp3n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The new vote capture system is a consequence of the recent Senate voting rule changes.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Richard Wainwright</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>This article was co-authored by Ian Brightwell, former director of IT at the New South Wales Electoral Commission.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>A computerised system is being used for the first time in the 2016 election count for all Senate ballot papers to capture voters’ preferences.</p>
<p>On the surface, this process, conducted out of the public gaze, may not seem to have significant risk compared to <a href="https://theconversation.com/election-explainer-why-cant-australians-vote-online-57738">electronic voting and electronic counting</a>. However, it has similar risks to full-scale electronic voting.</p>
<p>Electronic election systems can fail catastrophically (wrong person elected), irreversibly (hold the election again?) and invisibly (could I notice if my vote was counted incorrectly?). This is significantly different from commercial systems such as electronic banking.</p>
<p>Accordingly, electronic election systems need to be engineered extremely carefully to control the risk and rate of flaws and bugs, and be developed and operated openly with scrutiny so that bugs, errors and vulnerabilities, which will inevitably be present, can be detected before they have a difficult-to-reverse impact.</p>
<p>However, the new Senate vote capture system had to be built rapidly, with little time for design or testing, and is being operated in a way that allows only part of the process to be scrutinised.</p>
<p>There are risks that time pressures over the next few weeks may encourage shortcuts to be taken that would further reduce the level of scrutiny, and also reduce the integrity of the vote capture process. This new system may well prove to be the weakest link in the election process.</p>
<h2>How does it work?</h2>
<p>The new vote capture system is a consequence of the Senate voting rule changes <a href="https://theconversation.com/senate-voting-changes-pass-so-how-do-we-elect-the-upper-house-now-55641">made in March</a> – voters are allowed to mark multiple preferences for both above-the-line and below-the-line voting. As a result, the vote preferences in all Senate ballots must be captured for electronic counting.</p>
<p>Previously, multiple preferences were allowed only for below-the-line voting, which occurred in <a href="http://results.aec.gov.au/17496/Website/SenateUseOfGvtByState-17496.htm">just 3% of Senate ballots</a>. With the new voting rules nearly 100% of ballots have multiple preferences.</p>
<p>To handle the substantial increase in data entry volume, a more efficient vote capture system needed to be rapidly developed.</p>
<p>The new system scans each Senate ballot and determines the preferences using optical character recognition (OCR) software. A human operator may check and correct these preferences as needed. Separately, another human operator views the scanned image and manually enters the preferences. </p>
<p>The computer’s preferences and the manually entered preferences are compared. If they don’t match, the preferences are corrected by a different operator.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/131011/original/image-20160719-13837-1anzwi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/131011/original/image-20160719-13837-1anzwi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/131011/original/image-20160719-13837-1anzwi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=234&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131011/original/image-20160719-13837-1anzwi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=234&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131011/original/image-20160719-13837-1anzwi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=234&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131011/original/image-20160719-13837-1anzwi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=294&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131011/original/image-20160719-13837-1anzwi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=294&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131011/original/image-20160719-13837-1anzwi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=294&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Senate vote capture process (recommended additional steps shown with dashes).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Authors</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Scrutineers can observe this process as it is happening and intervene if they notice anything being entered incorrectly.</p>
<p>This process has commendable features. The dual checking of preference marking is important: OCR software has notorious difficulties correctly interpreting the highly variable handwriting of millions of voters.</p>
<h2>What are the risks?</h2>
<p>With all automated election systems (voting, capturing, counting) the key danger to be controlled is of the votes eventually counted not being the same as those cast by the voters.</p>
<p>The impact of even infrequent errors is amplified in the current Senate vote capture system because all votes are potentially affected, rather than the smaller proportion of votes processed in previous elections.</p>
<p>Suppose an optimistic capture accuracy of 99.9%. In New South Wales, which has 4.6 million Senate ballot papers, there would be about 4,600 incorrect votes. This could easily change Senate outcomes.</p>
<p>In reality, the capture accuracy could be reduced by a number of critical weak points in the system:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>operators making corrections could introduce deliberate or unintentional errors: vote tampering by officials has been reported in the past;</p></li>
<li><p>all scrutiny and checking is against a displayed image of a ballot, not the physical ballot itself. Vote changes due to accidental or malicious bugs in the image scanning or display software will be entirely invisible to operators and scrutineers;</p></li>
<li><p>operators and scrutineers working long shifts will make mistakes and overlook errors. This is exacerbated by fast processing of ballot papers as part of the system’s design, and by potential shortages of scrutineers; and</p></li>
<li><p>mounting time pressure over the coming weeks could lead to manual checks and scrutiny being reduced or dropped to speed up the process.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Another critical vulnerability is that votes could be altered by tampering or error after capture but before being transferred to the counting system. The current process doesn’t provide a way for the Australian Electoral Commission or scrutineers to check that the system preserves vote integrity.</p>
<p>This is an underlying problem with election technology: scrutiny requires highly specialised skills to check what is electronic, invisible and cryptic. And candidates with concerns over undetected technological bugs and failures currently have no recourse aside from <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cea1918233/s278.html">general provisions for recounts</a>.</p>
<h2>Mitigating the risks</h2>
<p>It is essential that a random sample of the paper Senate ballots be checked against the final published electronic votes used for counting. This will help assure the integrity of the entire vote capture process.</p>
<p>To mitigate the emerging risks of election technology a new approach to scrutiny and transparency is necessary.</p>
<p>A good first step, already adopted overseas (<a href="http://www.cartercenter.org/resources/pdfs/peace/democracy/carter-center-norway-2013-study-mission-report2.pdf">such as in Norway</a>), would be to establish an independent electronic election board to provide oversight and scrutiny of election technology. This board would consist of experts from a range of fields, including election management, failure-critical engineering, security, risk, audit and statistics.</p>
<p>With technology increasingly pervading elections, immediate steps towards effective, meaningful scrutiny of election technology is the only way to maintain trust in Australia’s traditionally high-quality electoral process.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62436/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The new Senate vote capture system had to be built rapidly, with little time for design or testing, and is being operated in a way that allows only part of the process to be scrutinised.Roland Wen, Visiting Fellow, UNSW SydneyRichard Buckland, Associate Professor in Computer Security, Cybercrime, and Cyberterror, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/623572016-07-17T20:08:39Z2016-07-17T20:08:39ZWhat’s next for asylum seekers under a re-elected Turnbull government?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/130621/original/image-20160714-2147-wozln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The government’s first priority should be to improve conditions in offshore detention centres in Nauru and Papua New Guinea.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Eoin Blackwell</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Dealing with refugee flows requires sophisticated policies that reflect both domestic and international realities. These realities include Australia’s status as a sovereign nation that wishes to protect its borders, but also as a country operating in a highly globalised world. </p>
<p>That world is <a href="https://theconversation.com/only-a-global-response-can-solve-europes-refugee-crisis-47040">experiencing</a> situations of protracted armed conflict and large numbers of refugees. The key challenge for the returned Turnbull government is to formulate policies that reflect this complexity and present Australia as a good global citizen willing to take its fair share of refugees. </p>
<p>These policies therefore must be ones that go beyond a focus on <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-boats-may-have-stopped-but-at-what-cost-to-australia-30455">“stopping the boats”</a> and lead to sustainable solutions. To a large extent, this will rest on Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s ability to persuade reluctant factions within his party of the need to re-calibrate certain aspects of Coalition policy.</p>
<h2>Policy priorities</h2>
<p>The government’s first priority should be to improve conditions in offshore detention facilities in Nauru and Papua New Guinea. </p>
<p>The government has argued the Australian public widely supports its “tough” border policies, but there is evidence of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/10/let-them-stay-australia-backlash-267-asylum-seekers-island-detention-camps">growing disquiet</a> about aspects of offshore detention. These include the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-04/nauru-conditions-'cruel'-and-'inhumane'-former-teacher-says/7140484">detention of children</a>, the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/02/second-refugee-sets-themselves-alight-on-nauru">mental health of detainees</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-25/manus-island-blunder-blamed-for-asylum-seeker-death/7355858">inadequate standards of medical care</a>. The government will therefore need to put in place measures to ensure greater oversight over operations in its offshore detention centres. </p>
<p>Specifically, the government must deal with two urgent policy matters relating to offshore detention as a priority. </p>
<p>First, it must formulate a plan to <a href="https://theconversation.com/if-not-manus-then-what-possible-alternatives-for-asylum-seekers-and-refugees-in-png-58514">deal with the repercussions</a> of the PNG Supreme Court’s decision in April this year. The court found detention of refugees and asylum seekers in the Australian-funded centre on PNG was unconstitutional under the right to liberty in the PNG Constitution.</p>
<p>The Australia government has not yet released a proper response. Immigration Minister Peter Dutton has <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-28/png-responsible-for-manus-island-asylum-seeker-dutton-says/7369032">simply argued</a> that the PNG court decision is not binding on Australia, and that the asylum seekers and refugees in the centre are PNG’s responsibility. </p>
<p>However, the legal position is far more complex than that. Further litigation on this issue has begun in both <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/may/04/manus-island-detainees-launch-high-court-bid-to-be-moved-to-australia">PNG and Australian courts</a>. The government must develop a policy response to this litigation to ensure its offshore centres operate within the law.</p>
<p>A second urgent matter will be for the government to agree on how to resettle those asylum seekers who have been recognised as refugees by authorities in Papua New Guinea and Nauru. </p>
<p>Previous policies that have used developing nations such as Cambodia have clearly <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-09/cambodia-refugee-resettlement-program-labelled-an-expensive-joke/7231852">not worked</a>. There is also evidence that PNG and Nauru are not <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/20/resettling-refugees-in-papua-new-guinea-a-tragic-theatre-of-the-absurd">suitable resettlement places for refugees</a>. As a result, these refugees are living in limbo. </p>
<p>Turnbull must find a workable solution. This may require him to <a href="https://theconversation.com/resettling-refugees-in-australia-would-not-resume-the-people-smuggling-trade-60253">change tack</a> to allow those persons recognised as refugees in the offshore processing centres to be resettled in Australia. </p>
<p>The reality is there is simply no political will in our region to take refugees who are seen as Australia’s responsibility. This will be a test of Turnbull’s ability to persuade his party of the moral and political need for a change in policy.</p>
<h2>Long-term, creative solutions</h2>
<p>In addition to these urgent policy matters, the government needs to rethink its approach to resettlement. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.liberal.org.au/our-plan/protecting-our-borders">Official Liberal Party policy</a> states the government will maintain the resettlement quota at 13,750 places per year for the next two financial years, increasing to 18,750 places in 2018-19. While this is a positive move, the government needs to find more creative ways of providing avenues to refugees to come to Australia, particularly given the great <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/575836267/unhcr-projected-global-resettlement-needs-2017.html">international need for resettlement</a>. </p>
<p>One example of a creative policy solution is the <a href="http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/publications/ref-sponsor/">Canadian model of private sponsorship</a>. This allows organisations like church groups to sponsor refugees. Under this program, the relevant group agrees to fund a refugee’s resettlement costs for one year. This also has the advantage of providing a personal contact for the resettled refugee, which in turn assists with community integration. </p>
<p>Australia’s Department of Immigration conducted a similar pilot in 2012. Its 2015 <a href="https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/discussion-papers/cps-consultation.pdf">report on the pilot</a> suggested such a program:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… could provide an additional resettlement pathway. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Given the support for refugees expressed by community groups, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-04/churches-offer-sanctuary-to-asylum-seekers/7138484">particularly churches</a>, the government should pursue this policy option in the next year. It also has the advantage of perhaps being politically acceptable to all factions within the Coalition – even those that are against any increase in the official resettlement program. </p>
<p>More broadly, the government must take a longer-term, global view of asylum policy that results in durable solutions for refugees. This includes developing a greater understanding of the position of countries in our region, as well as a more realistic awareness of Australia’s responsibilities as a wealthy, industrialised nation in a globalised world.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62357/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Maria O'Sullivan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The key challenge for the returned Turnbull government is to formulate policies that present Australia as a good global citizen willing to take its fair share of refugees.Maria O'Sullivan, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, and Associate, Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/624572016-07-15T03:48:09Z2016-07-15T03:48:09ZTime to tighten the reins on politicians and their ‘truths’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/130624/original/image-20160714-2144-1ryxjl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The idea of regulating what is 'true' in political speech is neither new nor easy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Labor’s “<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-australian-medical-association-rebukes-labor-on-medicare-privatisation-claims-20160621-gpou61.html">Mediscare</a>” campaign. The Coalition and industry claims that Labor’s housing policy would deflate – and inflate – property prices. The Brexiteers’ <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nigel-farage-good-morning-britain-eu-referendum-brexit-350-nhs_uk_576d0aa3e4b08d2c5638fc17">pitch</a> that the leaving the European Union would free up £350 million a week for the UK health system. These are not Goebbelsian “big lies”.</p>
<p>But when campaigns are built on manipulation and occasional mendacity, trust in democratic politics is corroded. Can the law play a role in redressing these risks?</p>
<p>The idea of regulating “truth” in political speech is not new, nor is it easy. Political debate and truth can seem like oil and water. Politics is slippery. And it floats above the realm of clarity and rationality.</p>
<h2>Truth in political advertising</h2>
<p>Businesses, in trade and commerce, must avoid <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/publications/advertising-selling/advertising-and-selling-guide/avoid-misleading-or-deceptive-claims-or-conduct/misleading-or-deceptive-conduct">“misleading or deceptive conduct”</a>. This rule even captures innocent mis-statements. They can suffer <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jul/11/snack-companies-fined-22000-for-false-claims-they-were-tuckshop-friendly">civil sanctions</a> at the hands of the ACCC as the consumer watchdog, or rival companies. Why not mirror such laws in the political and social sphere?</p>
<p>Several parliamentary reports have called for <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/RP9697/97rp13">truth in political advertising regulation</a>. Australia briefly had such a law between the 1983 and 1984 elections. It was <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/num_act/celaa1983425/s114.html">Section 161 (2)</a> of the then national electoral act. And South Australia and the Northern Territory retain laws against material errors in electoral ads.</p>
<p>The minor parties are especially supportive of the idea. After all, they don’t have the resources to fight back against slurs, whether from other parties or the media. But they might be careful what they wish for. Smaller players also are the least able to afford to defend themselves from legalistic regimes.</p>
<p>The major parties – they who must be obeyed, legislatively – are less inclined to agree. Take this response from the Howard government in 1998:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The government firmly believes that political advertising should be truthful in its content. However, any legislation introduced to enforce this principle would be difficult to enforce … voters, using whatever assistance they see fit from the media and other sources, remain the most appropriate arbiters of the worth of political claims.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Without such rules, the law of politics in Australia is <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/about_aec/Publications/Backgrounders/electoral-advertising.htm">fairly thin</a>. There is the law of defamation. But that is slow, costly to invoke, and only protects individual reputations. There are sanctions for misleading parliament. But these are sparingly applied and only cover MPs in their own house or evidence to parliamentary inquiries.</p>
<p>Australia also has rules requiring “authorisation” of most political advertising. But such disclosure rules apply more easily to <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cea1918233/s328.html">traditional</a> than <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cea1918233/s328a.html">electronic</a> campaigning. And at best they give formal information about <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/fake-tradie-andrew-macrae-tracked-down-as-a-reallife-metalworker-from-sydneys-north-shore/news-story/d628d844056feb6a24c4b4a0a4dc915b">who is speaking</a>. They don’t touch the content.</p>
<h2>Promises and visions splendid</h2>
<p>It’s one thing to invoke truth-in-campaigning as a virtue. It’s another to define what it would involve.</p>
<p>Without sounding post-modernist, the ultimate question is “what is truth in politics”? Much of politics is beyond truth. It’s about advocating a vision and sense of trust. Not just puffery: good political oratory has always been about galvanising people around shared ideals for future action.</p>
<p>Take the concrete examples we began with. “Mediscare” contained a linguistic fudge – “privatisation” as a pejorative for outsourcing and cuts. The law cannot tie down language. But it also involved mis-characterisations of government policy, whose truth can be judged.</p>
<p>Then there was negative advertising about negative gearing. It was mostly hype, based on contentious modelling. Hype can be untruthful. But judging the value of economic predictions is not going to be a fruitful exercise for a tribunal in an election.</p>
<p>What of the Brexit claims? A claim like a “£350 million saving”, without mentioning rebates, can be adjudged false. But the sting was the link to health funding. That was a promise, about which only time could tell, and then only if those making the promises came to power.</p>
<p>Assessing any promise is tough. A judge once said “the state of a man’s mind is as much a fact as the state of his belly”, but psychologists would disagree. Australians were agitated in the Gillard-Abbott years over “lies” on carbon tax and budget cuts. But what we really meant was promises should stick, unless underlying circumstances changed.</p>
<h2>The what and whom of truth in politics</h2>
<p>It’s false to suggest one can regulate “truth in politics”. The law’s might is limited. First, in what it can cover.</p>
<p>The short-lived 1980s rule covered only election-period advertisements containing “statements” that were “untrue and likely to be misleading or deceptive”. Reasonable ignorance was a defence.</p>
<p>Similarly, the ongoing <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/consol_act/ea1985103/s113.html">South Australian rule</a> only covers statements in election advertisements. And then only statements that purport to be factual, and which are materially misleading – that is, misleading in a significant way, given the context and degree of error.</p>
<p>Then there’s the question of process, of who will arbitrate. Electoral commissions run a mile from becoming embroiled in partisan tit-for-tattery. That said, the South Australian commission is not disrespected because it can request an advertisement be fixed or dropped.</p>
<p>Judges are also shy of getting involved. But in South Australia, this only happens after an election, <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/sa/SASC/2002/338.html">if a very close result is challenged</a>, or if the authorities seek a fine.</p>
<p>Finally there’s the problem of abuse of the complaints process, of parties crying wolf.</p>
<p>I used to think the “who” question was insuperable. On balance I now think it is answerable. Not with judges who are removed from the realities of political debate, but with a tribunal of respected former politicians to rule on complaints.</p>
<p>Along with J.S. Mill, the 19th-century liberal MP and public intellectual, the traditional riposte to the urge to regulate is “let more speech flush out false speech”. That is echoed in the 1998 response above. But the case for doing nothing is growing weaker. And the case for experimenting with <a href="https://www.routledge.com/The-Law-of-Deliberative-Democracy/Levy-Orr/p/book/9780415705004">regulation to improve deliberation</a> is more compelling.</p>
<p>Certainly self-regulation is as important as formal regulation. But self-regulation comes and goes like the dew. The project of media-based “fact-checking” held promise. But it only reaches a small audience. And, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-18/abc-fact-check-unit-to-close-14-jobs-to-go/7425638">in the ABC’s case</a>, it is being defunded.</p>
<p>Commercial media used to play a role. The federation of commercial TV stations, or FACTS, once heard complaints against misleading political advertising.* It washed its hands of the matter, fearful of offending the big parties who are major advertisers. Free TV Australia now just vets broadcast ads to ensure they are properly authorised and not defamatory.</p>
<p>Faced with the evidence of a butchered cherry tree, a young George Washington <a href="http://www.mountvernon.org/digital-encyclopedia/article/cherry-tree-myth/">supposedly could tell no lie</a>. Even if modern politicians had such proverbial sincerity, competitive elections breed advocates who overlook nuances, in their quest to win an argument to advance their cause. Regulation is no panacea, but it may help.</p>
<p><em>*Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly said the Australian Press Council heard complaints against misleading political advertising. This is wrong and the reference has been removed. The author notes that the then Advertising Standards Council formerly received complaints about political advertising carried by the press.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62457/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Graeme Orr receives funding from the ARC to research the law of deliberative democracy (with Dr Ron Levy of the ANU). He has previously received ARC and Electoral Council of Australia funding to work with the electoral commissions (with Prof George Williams of UNSW). He is currently a fellow of the Australian Academy of Law and an associate of the TJ Ryan Foundation.</span></em></p>‘Mediscare’, Brexit and the negative-gearing campaign have all demonstrated that it is time for tighter regulation on truth in political advertising.Graeme Orr, Professor of Law, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.