Let me declare from the outset that I generally find all political parties to be dishonest when they feel the need to be. They've demonstrated time and time again that it is incredibly important for voters to scrutinise what is being proposed, because the game plan has been to consistently capitalise on the fears of the electorate.I therefore urge voters to question just about everything proposed by the Progressive Labour Party, One Bermuda Alliance and United Bermuda Party, especially as we get closer to the next general election. It is one thing to believe in democracy and the right to vote, but quite another to exercise that right responsibly.Kudos to the PLP! Without question they should be commended for getting rid of the annual voter registration. This requirement was particularly problematic, because elections in Bermuda are not fixed term.The abuse of the system kicked in when the ruling party believed that the level of registration in a given year was in their favour. They could then call an election knowing that those who were not registered to vote would be powerless to affect the next election.Eliminating the annual voter registration process addresses this problem. Unfortunately, it can also introduce problems with voters being registered in the wrong constituency when they relocate to another constituency and fail to update their registration. To what degree this is severe is anyone's guess, but the OBA thinks it is ten percent.If the OBA is correct, then I do believe that this needs to be addressed.Simply put, each voter should be voting within the constituency they live in.While some individuals may be comfortable with the idea of political parties policing the system, I am not so trusting. Call me cynical, but the PLP, OBA and UBP have not given me enough reason to believe that they would report a voter registered in the wrong constituency if it might cost them an election.I also question the effectiveness of election scrutineers who have been given a list of questionable voters. How does one's name end up on the list in the first place?Back to my primary point … upon reading the PLP's allegation, I felt the need to read for myself what the OBA was proposing. I downloaded their submission, and found that while it is true that they are proposing to reintroduce a voter registration requirement, this proposal directly follows their proposal for fixed term elections.What this means is that a ruling party would no longer have the ability to call an election when they believed that the voter registration was in their favour. Voters would know well in advance that an election is to take place within five years of the next general election, and it is their responsibility to register six to 12 months prior to that fixed term.For this reason I do not believe that it is honest for anyone to propose that the OBA is trying to deny lower income people the right to vote. That would just be an attempt to manipulate me into fearing the OBA.With fixed term elections, the ruling government would not have the power to jerk the electorate around by calling an election when political polls best suit their chances of re-election. This is a great thing!Further, at some point in our lives the vast majority of us have had a vehicle, driver's licence or passport, which is subject to fixed term registration. We fully understand what happens if we do not register our vehicle or passport by the fixed date.If we take our right to vote as seriously as our right to drive or travel, then introducing voter registration within the context of fixed term elections is not at all onerous or discriminatory.To me it seems to be a reasonable way of addressing the ten percent inaccuracy without unfairly denying any group their democratic rights.Now what do you think?