180 likes | 218 Views
Electoral Systems. Ensuring Representation, Ensuring Stability February 4 th , 2003. Electoral Systems. are never neutral help ensure certain outcomes and make other outcomes less likely the question – which type of outcome do different electoral systems favour??.
E N D
Electoral Systems Ensuring Representation, Ensuring Stability February 4th, 2003
Electoral Systems • are never neutral • help ensure certain outcomes and make other outcomes less likely • the question – which type of outcome do different electoral systems favour??
Single Member Plurality System (SMPS) • one representative per geographic area (riding, constituency, district) • ‘first-past-the-post’, ‘winner-take-all’ system • win a seat by having more votes than the next candidate • i.e. do not need a majority (50%+1) • to win overall election, party does NOT have to win the most votes
Effects of SMPS • tends to over-represent strongest party (more seats than votes warrant) • helps ensure majority government • decisive leadership • accountability • stability (governments do not fall often) • distorts patterns of representation
Distortion under SMPS • example: Canada • exacerbates regional differences in party support • favours parties with concentrated regional support • i.e. encourages regional parties • discourages minor national parties (e.g. with diffuse support) • exacerbates regionalized images of parties • creates impression that parties have little regional support
Alternative Systems: Proportional Representation • representation (# of seats) directly proportional to share of popular vote received (# of votes) • mechanics: • party lists • single transferable vote
PR – cont’d • advantages: • every vote counts • voters have greater choice • minorities and variety of interests better represented • disadvantages: • may produce unstable governments • encourages ideological polarity • splintering of party system • majority government unlikely • centralizes control with parties
Hypothetical Results Under Different Electoral Systems - 2000 Election
Alternative Systems: Proportional Representation • Western Europe • 21 of 28 countries using proportional representation • Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland
Other Alternative Systems – The Hybrid Model • German ‘Hybrid’Model • mixed member proportional system • 2 votes: candidate, party list • 5% rule • Germany, Bolivia, Venezuela, New Zealand, Hungary, parliaments of Scotland and Wales
Electoral Systems & Democracy • SMPS: • emphasizes accountability and stability • exaggerates majority rule • concern with rights of minorities • concern with representation • proportional representation • more competition, choice, political equality • better representation • costs? • accountability • stability • bold leadership
Electoral Systems & Power • which party does the SMPS system benefit most? • the winning party • which party would PR disadvantage most relative to current system • the winning party • what are the characteristics of the SMPS system • helps ensure that winning party has majority control over parliament • who’s consent is required to undertake shift to PR? • parliament (controlled by winning party) • Is change likely to take place??