There is no electoral system that is entirely “fair”. The best one can built into it is that it provides for strong government from one election to the next, preferably without giving minor parties too much clout. Germany’s present problem is exactly that, just as it was in the Weimar Republic. Then the Communists undermined Parliament wilfully, now the 18% Social Democrats (SPD) torpedo the election result by blackmailing the conservative CDU/CSU to accept their ideology as the state doctrine. As long as the SPD and other parties don’t understand that you can’t exclude the second largest party, the AfD , from parliamentary participation, while having no qualms about giving prominence and space to former GDR functionaries like Gregor Gysi, the future for German democracy looks somewhat bleak. It’s less about the election system than about attitudes.
1) The constituents is a winner takes it all setup. May even out over a lot of constituencies, but if you are worried about misrepresentation it is hypocritical to favour it in any way. All the votes that go to the runner-up candidates have no weight anymore in the parliament, hence no representation. In an extreme scenario, a party winning all constituencies with 51% would get 100% of the vote share. All others zero.
2) Despite being an obvious choice, the 50-50 split of the chamber between first and second vote is arbitrary. It could as well be 80-20, depending on the weight you want to put on local politicians vs big picture.
I'm not saying the voting system is without problems, but in my humble opinion there are no improvements in your changes.
Thanks for your article Jorg, it highlights something that is so prevalent in politics: the relentless fidgeting with rules, riding boundaries (constituencies) and the like in order to bring about desired results. We see it here in Canada. In fact the city I live in is divided into two “ridings” for the upcoming federal election. One is left wondering why!? Most people shake their heads and carry on with their day. Others are left to wonder what factors are involved as they have a suspicious feeling the situation is being manipulated for a reason.
Did Karlsruhe mandate a timeframe for a solution to the unconstitutional 5% hurdle, or can politicians that benefit from it drag their feet for as long as they want?
There is no electoral system that is entirely “fair”. The best one can built into it is that it provides for strong government from one election to the next, preferably without giving minor parties too much clout. Germany’s present problem is exactly that, just as it was in the Weimar Republic. Then the Communists undermined Parliament wilfully, now the 18% Social Democrats (SPD) torpedo the election result by blackmailing the conservative CDU/CSU to accept their ideology as the state doctrine. As long as the SPD and other parties don’t understand that you can’t exclude the second largest party, the AfD , from parliamentary participation, while having no qualms about giving prominence and space to former GDR functionaries like Gregor Gysi, the future for German democracy looks somewhat bleak. It’s less about the election system than about attitudes.
https://open.substack.com/pub/woistderscheiss/p/der-bundestag-blues-oder-wie-man?r=35toij&utm_medium=ios
Good points here but tossing out the 5% hurdle in a cavalier manner seems historically ignorant and dangerously shortsighted.
Two major problems with the reform:
1) The constituents is a winner takes it all setup. May even out over a lot of constituencies, but if you are worried about misrepresentation it is hypocritical to favour it in any way. All the votes that go to the runner-up candidates have no weight anymore in the parliament, hence no representation. In an extreme scenario, a party winning all constituencies with 51% would get 100% of the vote share. All others zero.
2) Despite being an obvious choice, the 50-50 split of the chamber between first and second vote is arbitrary. It could as well be 80-20, depending on the weight you want to put on local politicians vs big picture.
I'm not saying the voting system is without problems, but in my humble opinion there are no improvements in your changes.
Thanks for your article Jorg, it highlights something that is so prevalent in politics: the relentless fidgeting with rules, riding boundaries (constituencies) and the like in order to bring about desired results. We see it here in Canada. In fact the city I live in is divided into two “ridings” for the upcoming federal election. One is left wondering why!? Most people shake their heads and carry on with their day. Others are left to wonder what factors are involved as they have a suspicious feeling the situation is being manipulated for a reason.
Did Karlsruhe mandate a timeframe for a solution to the unconstitutional 5% hurdle, or can politicians that benefit from it drag their feet for as long as they want?