Conscience vote
| Part of thePolitics series |
| Party politics |
|---|
 Politics portal |
Aconscience voteorfree voteis a type of vote in alegislative bodywhere legislators are allowed to vote according to their own personalconsciencerather than according to an official line set down by theirpolitical party.In aparliamentary system,especially within theWestminster system,it can also be used to indicatecrossbenchmembers of ahung parliamentwhereconfidence and supplyis provided to allow formation of aminority governmentbut the right to vote on conscience is retained.[1][2]Free votesare found in Canadian and some British legislative bodies;conscience votesare used in Australian and New Zealand legislative bodies.
Under the Westminster system,MPswho belong to a political party are usually required by that party to vote in accordance with theparty lineon significant legislation, on pain of censure or expulsion from the party. Sometimes a particular party member known as theparty whipis responsible for maintaining thisparty discipline.[3]However, in the case of a conscience vote, a party declines to dictate an official party line to follow and members may vote as they please. In countries where party discipline is less important and voting against one's party is more common, conscience votes are generally less important.
In most countries, conscience votes are quite rare and are often about issues which are very contentious, or a matter on which the members of any single party differ in their opinions; thus making it difficult for parties to formulate official policies. Usually, a conscience vote will be about religious, moral or ethical issues rather than about administrative or financial ones. Matters such as theprohibition of alcohol,abortion,homosexualitylaw reform and the legality ofprostitutionare often subject to conscience votes.
Sometimes a vote may be free for some parties but not for others. For instance, when theConservativegovernment ofCanadian Prime MinisterStephen Harperproposed a motion to re-open the debate onCanada'ssame-sex marriage laws,his Conservatives and the oppositionLiberalsdeclared it a free vote for their members, while theBloc Québécoisand theNew Democratsboth maintained party discipline to defeat the measure.
Practice in various countries[edit]
Australia[edit]
Conscience votes have been held in theAustralian Parliamentand in State Parliaments on issues ofbecoming a republic,abortion,euthanasia, homosexuality, sex discrimination, prostitution, and bioethical issues like assisted reproduction and stem cell research,[4]besides other issues.
New Zealand[edit]
In theNew Zealand Parliament,conscience votes differ from party votes in that MPs must physically enter a lobby to vote on a motion rather than a party'swhipcalling out the votes on behalf of its MPs. A personal vote can be requested after a contested voice vote by any MP, but whether a personal or party vote is held is at the discretion of theSpeaker.Pieces of legislation which were treated as conscience issues in New Zealand include theHomosexual Law Reform Act 1986,Prostitution Reform Act 2003,Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007,Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Act 2013and the presentEnd of Life Choice BillandAbortion Legislation Act 2020.[5]The most common topic for conscience votes in New Zealand has been alcohol; a conscience vote relating to alcohol has happened every decade since the 1890s.[6]
United Kingdom[edit]
In theBritish House of Commonsthere used to[when?]be a conscience vote every few years on the restoration of thedeath penalty,which had been abolished in 1964 (except fortreason,for which it was abolished in 1998 in theHuman Rights Act). It had always been rejected and this practice has now been abandoned. In Britain, laws concerningabortionhave always been subject to a free vote.[citation needed]
The proposed bans onhunting with dogsproposed byTony Blair's government were the subject of several free votes in Parliament from 2001.[3]On each occasion the Commons voted for a ban and theHouse of Lordsrejected it. In 2004 the Government, trying to placate the Lords and other opponents of a ban, proposed only restriction and licensing of hunting but anti-hunting MPs (mostlyLabourbackbenchers) forced through an amendment which would effect a total ban. Seconds after the vote on the amendment, the Government bowed to pressure and agreed to force the ban through the Lords under theParliament Acts 1911 and 1949.It passed in November 2004.[citation needed]
Other decisions which were taken by a free vote include abandoning the experiment with permanentsummer timeand bringing television cameras into Parliament.[citation needed]
United States[edit]
In the United States, parties exercise comparatively little control over the votes of individual legislators. However, the parties'whipsoffer varying amounts of incentives or disincentives to unite the party on major votes. As an extreme case, DemocratJames Traficantwas stripped of his seniority and committee assignments in 2001 when he voted for a Republican,Dennis Hastert,to beSpeaker of the United States House of Representatives.
When a party's leadership declines to whip votes in a situation where they normally would, this is sometimes called a "conscience vote," "vote of conscience," or members "voting their consciences." For instance, an aide to Senate Minority WhipDick Durbinsaid that "Decisions about war and peace are conscience votes and they aren’t whipped traditionally," regarding thepotential disapproval of the Iran nuclear agreement.[7]Similarly, when House Republican leadership decided not to whip votes against thesecond impeachmentofDonald Trump,Liz Cheney—the third-highest-ranking Republican—referred to the matter as a "vote of conscience".[8]At other times the terms are used to describe a vote based on personal morals rather than political considerations.[9][10]
See also[edit]
- Aisle (political term)
- Crossing the floor
- Party switching
- Westminster system
- Whip (politics),in UK politics voting against the party line is known as "defying the whip"
- Party discipline
References[edit]
- ^"Understanding Conscience Vote Decisions: The Case of the ACT"(PDF).Australian Parliamentary Review.Australian Study of Parliament Group. 2013. Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2015-02-28.Retrieved2015-03-26.
- ^"Conscience votes during the Howard Government 1996 - 2007".Australian Parliament House. 2 February 2009.
- ^abPriddy, Sarah (16 November 2016)."Free votes in the House of Commons since 1997"(PDF).House of Commons Library.Retrieved22 April2017.
- ^Donaghey, Corrie; Galloway, Kate (2011)."Analysing Conscience Votes in Parliament: Do Churches Influence the Law"(PDF).James Cook University Law Review.18:84–112.Retrieved22 September2019.
- ^"When MPs go with their gut: what is a conscience vote?".Radio New Zealand.13 November 2018.Retrieved13 November2018.
- ^Flahive, Brad (2017-09-11)."What is a conscience vote and why does it matter?".Stuff.Retrieved2020-10-20.
- ^Kiefer, Francine (24 July 2015)."Why some Democratic senators describe Iran deal as a 'conscience vote'".Christian Science Monitor.
- ^Herb, Jeremy; Raju, Manu; Fox, Lauren; Mattingly, Phil (12 January 2021)."Impeachment a 'vote of conscience' for GOP".CNN.Retrieved12 January2021.
House Republican leaders won't whip their colleagues and tell them to vote against the impeachment resolution on Wednesday, according to leadership aides. Rep. Liz Cheney, the No. 3 in GOP leadership [...], did not tell her members how to vote Monday, but she called the impeachment vote a 'vote of conscience.'
- ^Cutter, Stephanie (9 September 2013)."Congress, let this be a vote of conscience".CNN.Retrieved12 January2021.
Voting your conscience – standing up for what you believe in – is not only the safest way to ensure you can articulate a defense for your vote, but it's also your duty as an elected official.
- ^Anderson, Nick; Simon, Richard (11 October 2002)."For Dissenters, 'Nos' Were a Vote of Conscience".Los Angeles Times.Retrieved12 January2021.
Still, many of the dissenters made clear that the vote was one of the toughest of their careers. They said they relied more on conscience than ideology in making up their minds.