Question # 4 20 marks
QUEBEC REFERENDUM VOTE: WAS THERE ELECTORAL FRAUD?*
Quebecers have been debating whether to separate from Canada and form an independent nation. A
referendum was held on October 30, 1995, in which the people of Quebec voted not to separate. The vote
was extremely close, with the “No” side winning by only 52,448 votes. A large number of “No” votes was
cast by the non-Francophone (non-French-speaking) people of Quebec, who make up about 20% of the
population and who very much want to remain Canadians. The remaining 80% are Francophones, a
majority of whom voted “Yes”.
After the votes were counted, it became clear that the tallied vote was much closer than it should have been.
Supporters of the “No” side charged that poll scrutineers, all of whom were appointed by the proseparatist
provincial government, rejected a disproportionate number of ballots in ridings where the percentage of
“Yes” votes was low and where there are large numbers of Allophone (people whose first language is
neither English nor French) and Anglophone (English-speaking) residents. (Electoral laws require the
rejection of ballots that do not appear to be properly marked. They were outraged that in a strong
democracy like Canada, votes would be rigged much like in many nondemocratic countries around the
world.
If, in ridings where there was a low percentage of “Yes” votes there was a high percentage of rejected
ballots, this would be evidence of electoral fraud. Moreover, if in ridings where there were large
percentages of Allophone and/or Anglophone voters, there were high percentages of rejected ballots, this
too would constitute evidence of fraud on the part of the scrutineers and possibly the government.
In order to determine the veracity of the charges, the following variables were recorded for each riding:
Percentage of rejected ballots in referendum
Percentage of “Yes” votes
Percentage of Allophones
Percentage of Anglophones
A multiple regression analysis to determine how the percentages of “yes” votes, Allophones, and
Anglophones were related to the percentage of rejected ballots was performed and is summarized
below
SUMMARY OUTPUT
Regression Statistics
Multiple R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Standard Error
Observations
0.372093
0.138453
0.117092
0.981088
125
ANOVA
df
Regression
Residual
Total
Intercept
Pct Yes
Pct Allo
Pct Anglo
3
121
124
SS
MS
F
Significance F
18.71651 6.238838 6.481686 0.000418362
116.4665 0.962533
135.183
Coefficients Standard Error t Stat
P-value
1.565643
0.739285 2.11778 0.03624
0.000262
0.012072 0.02169 0.982731
0.036747
0.010332 3.556591 0.000537
-0.00904
0.01299 -0.69592 0.487811
________________________________
* This case is based on “Voting Irregularities in the 1995 Referendum on Quebec Sovereignty,” by Jason
Cawley and Paul Sommers, Chance, Vol. 9, No. 4, Fall 1996. We are grateful to Dr. Paul Sommers,
Middlebury College, for his assistance in writing this case.
Can we infer that electoral fraud took place? If so, how did it manifest itself?