Representation, Elections, and Voting (POL 1200) PDF

REPRESENTATION, ELECTIONS AND VOTING PART 2 POL 1200 Electoral systems An electoral system is a set of rules that governs the conduct of elections. Not only do these rules vary across the world; they are also, in many countries, the subject of fierce political deb...

REPRESENTATION, ELECTIONS AND VOTING PART 2 POL 1200 Electoral systems An electoral system is a set of rules that governs the conduct of elections. Not only do these rules vary across the world; they are also, in many countries, the subject of fierce political debate and argument. These rules vary in a number of ways: 1. Voters may be asked to choose between candidates or between parties 2. Voters may either select a single candidate, or vote preferentially ranking the candidates they wish to support in order (Single Transferable Vote system)  Electoral systems can be divided into two broad categories on the basis of how they convert votes into seats; Majoritarian/Plurality systems and Proportional systems 1. Majoritarian/Plurality systems In majoritarian electoral systems, winning candidates are those having attracted the most votes in a given electoral district. Majoritarian systems differ according to the number of representatives elected in an electoral district and the kinds of majorities (simple or absolute) that winners must achieve. In this system, larger parties typically win a higher proportion of seats than the proportion of votes they gain in the election. This increases the chances of a single party gaining a parliamentary majority and being able to govern on its own. In the UK for example, single-party government prevailed between 1945 and 2010 despite the fact that no party has achieved an electoral majority since 1935. 2. Proportional systems: This system guarantees an equal (or at least more equal) relationship between the seats won by a party and the votes gained in the election. The principle of PR is the principle that parties should be represented in an assembly or parliament in direct proportion to their overall electoral strength; that is, their percentage or seats equaling their percentage of votes. Example, in a pure system of Proportional Representation (PR) a party that gains 45% of the votes would win exactly 45% of the seats. PR makes single-party majority rule less likely and are commonly associated with multi-party systems and coalition governments. The PR system is commonly used in continental Europe and is concerned more with the representation of parties than of individual candidates, and may be particularly suitable for divided or plural societies. That is, in societies with traditional ethnic, linguistic and religious cleavages or societies experiencing pervasive class and ideological conflicts - where some sections of the population lacked representation in key political decision making at the parliamentary level PR emerged as a useful alternative electoral system. 3. Mixed Systems In addition to pure majoritarian and proportional systems, some countries utilize Mixed or Hybrid electoral systems e.g.. Guyana which utilizes a combination of the First Past The Post (FPTP) majoritarian system and the Party List proportional system Of the Majoritarian /Plurality system, the First Past The Post – [FPTP] system/ Single Member Plurality is the most widely used Of the Proportional Representation system, the Party List system is the most widely used Of the mixed systems, Mixed-Member/Hybrid Proportional system (MMP)/Additional Member System (AMS) is most widely used First Past The Post – [FPTP] system/ Single Member Plurality (Maj. Syst.) USA, Can, India, UK (House of Commons) It is viewed as the simplest form of plurality/majority voting Features of FPTP The country is divided into single-member constituencies, usually of equal size Each constituency may be contested by single representative from the various political parties Voters select a single candidate, usually marking his/her name with a cross or X The winner or person receiving the most votes is the elected representative for that constituency The winning candidate needs to achieve only a plurality of the votes (the first-past the post rule). Plurality of votes means the largest number out of a collection of numbers (Heywood)  A plurality of votes describes a circumstance when a candidate polls more votes than any other, but does not receive a majority (more than half). For example, if 100 votes were cast, including 45 for Candidate A, 30 for Candidate B and 25 for Candidate C, then Candidate A received a plurality of votes but not a majority. (Candidate A did not receive more than half of all votes cast Advantages of FPTP The system establishes a clear link between representatives and constituents, as representatives are selected from their own constituencies thereby ensuring that constituency duties are carried out. Additionally, the legislature is comprised of members from all constituencies, hence wider and closer representation It offers the electorate a clear choice of potential parties of government It allows for the formation of governments that have a clear mandate from the electorate, albeit often on the basis of plurality support amongst the electorate It keeps extremists at bay by making it more difficult for small radical parties to gain seats and credibility It makes for strong and effective government in that a single party usually has majority control of the parliament/assembly It produces stable government in that single-party governments rarely collapse as a result of disunity and friction (as would a coalition government). Disadvantages of FPTP The system wastes many votes (perhaps most); those cast for losing candidates and those cast for winning ones over the plurality mark. It distorts electoral preferences by under-representing small parties with geographically evenly distributed support It offers only limited choice because of its duopolistic (two-party) tendencies It can potentially discourages third parties / smaller parties, because of the disproportionality between votes and seats. Similarly it discourages minority candidates from contesting in districts where they are perceived to lack or not attract wide support It undermines the legitimacy of government, in that governments often enjoy only minority support, producing a system of plurality rule It leads to unaccountable government in that the legislature is usually subordinate to the executive, because the majority of the members are supporters of the governing party It can promote gerrymandering or manipulation of the boundaries/ size of constituencies to strategically move/ locate voters in the attempt to advantage or disadvantage a candidate / party. Party list system (Type: Proportional system) Party List PR is the most widely used type of PR systems Features Either the entire country is treated as a single constituency, or in the case of the regional party lists, there are a number of large multi-member constituencies Parties compile a list of candidates to be placed before the electorate Electorate vote for party, not for candidates Parties are allocated seats in direct proportion to the votes they gain in the election. They fill these seats from the party list A threshold may be imposed (5% in Germany) to exclude small, possibly extremist parties from representation Advantages of the Party List system This system is deemed the only potentially pure system of proportional representation and is therefore fair to all parties The majority of the votes are counted toward the allocation of parliamentary seats, therefore wasted votes are eliminated The system promotes unity by encouraging electors to identify with their nation or region, rather than with a constituency The system makes it easier for women and minority candidates to be elected, provided that they feature on the party list It incentivizes third party creation and promotes multi party systems. Hence, the representation of a large number of small parties ensures that there is an emphasis upon Disadvantages of the Party List system Because of the tendency to encourage the presence of multiple parties, there is lesser chance for a single party to gain an absolute majority of the votes. Hence, there is the tendency to create coalition governments which could lead to weak and unstable government The electorate may vote for a list of candidates representing a party, but after seats are won, the electorate are not allowed to decide on who occupy those seats Party List PR allows for too much power to be vested in the hands of the core leadership of parties which is tasked with deciding who fill the seats won The link between representatives and constituents is (usually) entirely broken Unpopular candidates who are well-placed on a party list cannot (usually) be removed from office Parties become heavily centralized, because leaders draw up party lists, and junior members have an incentive to be loyal with the hope of moving up the list  Mixed-Member/Hybrid Proportional system (MMP)/Additional Member System (AMS) Germany, New Zealand, Guyana Features: A proportion of seats (50% in Germany for example) are filled by the SMP/FPTP system using single member constituencies The remaining seats are filled using the Party-list system Electors cast two votes; one for a candidate in the constituency election, and the other for a party Advantages of Mixed/hybrid systems The hybrid nature of this system balances the need for constituency representation against the need for electoral fairness. The party-list process ensures that the whole assembly/parliament is proportionally representative It allows electors to choose a constituency representative from one party and yet support another party to form a government It takes account of the fact that representing constituents and holding ministerial office are very different jobs that require very different talents and experience Disadvantages of Mixed/Hybrid systems The retention of single-member constituencies prevents the achievement of high levels of proportionality The system creates two classes of representatives; one burdened by insecurity and constituency duties, the other having higher status and the prospect of holding ministerial office Constituency representation suffers because of the size of constituencies (usually very large) Parties become more centralized and powerful under this system, as they decide not only who has the security of being on the list and who has to fight constituencies, but also where on the list candidates are placed  Where do we situate Guyana on the spectrum of electoral systems? FPTP prior to 1964, pure PR after 1964 until 2001. Evolving mixed system since 2001 Mixed in terms of allocation of seats and how candidates are identified – two methods of gaining seats; two party lists Seats through proportionality: List PR at the national level – national top up list Constituency system at the Regional level  Voting behaviour This is associated with Behavioural Political Science It carries the notion that voting held the key to disclosing all the mysteries of a political system since voting provides one of the richest sources of information about individuals, society and politics. Voting behaviour is shaped by (usually) short-term and long-term influences Short-term influences: The chief short-term influence is the state of the economy which reflects that there is usually a link between a government’ s popularity and economic variables such as unemployment, inflation and disposable income. Optimism about one’s own material circumstances (the feel good factor) appears to be particularly crucial here. It is argued that governments usually attempt to create pre-elections boom in the hope of improving their chances at re- election Another short-term influence speaks to the personality and public standing of party leaders, because media exposure portrays leaders as the brand image of their party. This means that at times, a party may try to rekindle popular support by replacing a leader who is perceived to be an electoral liability The style and effectiveness of parties’ electoral campaign is another short term influence. Theories of voting: These speak to psychological, sociological, economic, and ideological influences on voting 1. Party-identification model (USA… Democrat or Republican) This is the earliest theory of voting behavior. It is based on a sense of psychological attachment that people have to parties. This model places heavy stress on political socialization, seeing the family as the principal means through which political loyalties are forged. Members identify with a party in the sense of being long-term supporters who regard the party as “their” party Voting is a manifestation of partisanship, not a product of calculation influenced by factors such as policies, personalities, campaigning, and media coverage Attitudes towards leaders, as well as perceptions about group and personal interests, tend to be developed on the basis of party identification. Events are thus interpreted to fit with pre-existing loyalties and attachments. Strength: Partisan alignment tends to create stability and continuity in terms of habitual patterns of voting behavior, often sustained over a long period of time Weakness: Partisan de-alignment is taking place as there is a fall in party identification as well as a decline in habitual voting behavior. 2. Sociological model (UK Labour-Conservative two-party system) This model links voting behaviour to group membership, suggesting that electors tend to adopt a voting pattern that reflect the economic and social position of the group to which they belong. Rather than developing a psychological attachment to a party on the basis of family influence, this model highlights importance of social alignment, reflecting the various divisions and tensions within the society. The most significant of these divisions are class, gender, race/ethnicity, religion, and region. In some societies, party systems are seen to reflect the class system, with the middle class providing the electoral base for right wing parties and the working class providing the electoral base for left wing parties (UK) Criticisms: In focusing on social groups, it ignores the importance of the individual and the role of personal self-interest. There has also been a weakening of party support and class de-alignment. 3. Rational-choice model Attention is paid to the individual Voting is seen as a rational act in the sense that individuals are believed to decide their party preference on the basis of personal self- interest. Rather than being an habitual, a manifestation of broader attachments and allegiances, voting is seen as essentially instrumental; that is, a means to an end. For V. O Key (1966), Voting is seen as a retrospective comment on the party in power and how its performance has influenced citizens’ choice. Himmelveit et. al., portray voters as active in the sense that they behave like consumers, expressing a choice amongst the available policy options (issue voting). With issue voting, parties can significantly influence their electoral performance by revising and reshaping their policies. This model contributes significantly to partisan class dealignment. Primary source: Heywood, Andrew. Politics. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019 (Chapter 10)