Three (or more) options on a referendum?

Wise Old Elf

So this is probably a silly question, I do (think I:o) understand how referenda come about (i.e. President refers draft legislation to Council of State re: constitutionality), but in the context of the current controversy on abortions and legislating for the X case, could the Government bring two constitutional amendments to the people, so we would effectively have to tick one of three options:

1) No amendment to the relative article
2) Something along the lines of: While respecting the right to life of the unborn child, in cases where the life of the mother is at risk, or in cases where the foetus will not survive, termination of a pregnancy can be legislated for.
3) Terminations are to be allowed up to a specified number of weeks gestation.

I suppose the next question is, can you just tick one option, or would you have a PR style vote.
I know it's not really an option, but it could potentially clarify the will of the people on a fairly divisive issue. Just a thought.

oscarBravo

The problem with having three options on the ballot is the interpretation of the result. If the three options gain 34%, 33% and 33% of the vote respectively, does that mean the first option won, even though two thirds of the electorate rejected it?

Wise Old Elf

oscarBravo wrote: »

The problem with having three options on the ballot is the interpretation of the result. If the three options gain 34%, 33% and 33% of the vote respectively, does that mean the first option won, even though two thirds of the electorate rejected it?

True, a proviso that any amendment would have to achieve >50% of the valid votes would probably mean no amendment woudl ever get through. The only option then would be a PR Transfer maybe, people choose Option 3 as first preference, option 2 as second, so if Option 3 achieves the least votes, it is eliminated and the vote transferred to Option 2.

Complicated I know, just looking for peoples' views on a conversation I had with the other half last night.

Cookie_Monster

I would run it as two separate questions:
To steal your wording
1) Something along the lines of: While respecting the right to life of the unborn child, in cases where the life of the mother is at risk, or in cases where the foetus will not survive, termination of a pregnancy can be legislated for. YES / NO

2) Terminations are to be allowed up to a specified number of weeks gestation. YES / NO

And make it damn clear that if q1 gains over 50% than legislation etc will be passed regardless of the outcome of q2. if q2 gets passed by 50%+ then expanded legislation will be enacted.
If q1 <50% then two is also disregarded and nothing changes.

Wise Old Elf

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I would run it as two separate questions:
To steal your wording
1) Something along the lines of: While respecting the right to life of the unborn child, in cases where the life of the mother is at risk, or in cases where the foetus will not survive, termination of a pregnancy can be legislated for. YES / NO

2) Terminations are to be allowed up to a specified number of weeks gestation. YES / NO

And make it damn clear that if q1 gains over 50% than legislation etc will be passed regardless of the outcome of q2. if q2 gets passed by 50%+ then expanded legislation will be enacted.
If q1 <50% then two is also disregarded and nothing changes.

Good thinking. That has a much better chance of working than my way.