If
the Conservatives win in Ontario next month, as they might, it will be
in spite of themselves. At least, this is what the polls indicate.
The
numbers have the Tories closing up to the Grits as the election
campaign begins -- officially, that is, because unofficially it has
been under way for some time -- yet on a major election issue,
faith-based school funding, most voters support the Liberal position.
No wonder Ontario's Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty wants to make it
the election issue.
The question is, why is Tory leader John Tory
helping him? He, too, is playing up the issue of funding religious
schools. I can understand anyone not wanting to be the premier of
Ontario -- heck, I'd sooner dig ditches (I did once and hated it) --
but not being premier can easily be achieved by not running. This way,
Tory may be saddled with the job, plus the silly policy he espouses.
For
using public money to fund parochial schools is silly. Funding several
religions is more equitable than funding only one, but not a whit
smarter. You don't get from silly to smart by multiplication. The
formula isn't S(illy) X 3 = S(mart.) If funding Catholic schools is
silly, extending funding to Jewish and Muslim schools makes it silly
times three.
I understand parents who wish to raise their
children free of the baneful influence of Ontario's state religion,
Evangelical Left-Liberalism (as the commentator Alastair Gordon calls
it), but the solution is tax cuts and private (or home) schooling, not
dipping into each other's pockets for subsidies.
A politician
won't make the Guinness Book of Records for breaking an election
promise, but the Conservative leader is the carry-out type. That is why
one needs to pay close attention to what he says. His opponents are,
shall we say, more flexible -- but if Tory promises to do the wrong
thing, you can probably take it to the bank.
Faith-based school
funding seems the wrong thing to most Ontarians responding to the
latest Ipsos Reid poll. Yet -- and here's the paradox -- the same
voters are still narrowing the gap between the leading Grits and
trailing Tories. Don't these Ontarians realize that they're being
inconsistent? Or don't they care?
I think they don't care. In
stable, prosperous democracies such as Ontario, governments change
mainly when a narrow band of uncommitted or "swing" voters decide after
a couple of terms or so to give the other guys a chance. Policies and
personalities do matter, but they weigh less in the scales than the
increasing urge of swing voters for a change after any party has been
in power for a while.
And the Liberals may, just may, have had their run in Ontario.
What
about core voters? They're the opposite. Core voters -- "the base" --
seem to be as faithful as storks. A core Conservative or Liberal will
always vote Conservative or Liberal, and what's more, he or she may be
hard-wired to do so.
The link between political affiliation and
certain personality traits has long been suggested -- some would say
established -- by students of behaviour. Conservatives prefer absolutes
and consistency; liberals tolerate complexities and ambiguities. A
study published in the British journal Nature Neuroscience even posited
the heritability of a correlation between political views and so-called
"cognitive style" (no great news to novelists, gossip columnist, police
investigators, and other observers of human beings). And one New York
University study released this week suggests that the brains of
liberals and conservatives react differently to the same stimuli.
The
researchers used electroencephalographs to measure neuronal impulses in
the anterior cingulate cortex, a part of the brain linked with the
self-regulatory process of conflict monitoring. News reports say the
match-up was unmistakable: "Respondents who had described themselves as
liberals showed 'significantly greater conflict-related neural
activity' when the hypothetical situation called for an unscheduled
break in routine."
Oh boy. What if we're hard wired, not just as
liberals and conservatives, but as "core" and "swing" voters as well?
Suppose New York University's David Amodio and his colleagues are
right, and suppose pollsters are reading the tea leaves accurately.
In
that case, barring some scandal, Ontario's core conservatives and
liberals will reflexively vote Conservative and Liberal on Oct. 10,
while swing voters will support the party to which their pendulum-like
orbit happens to take them. And issues like faith-based school funding
that so exercise politicians, pressure groups, and pundits like me,
will count for very little.
George Jonas writes for the National Post.