| Proportional Representation |
Article Index for Proportional |
Website Links For Proportional Representation |
Information AboutProportional Representation |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION | |
| voting systems | |
| proportional representation electoral systems | |
| SHOPPER'S DELIGHT | |
|
Proportional representation, also known in the U.S.A. as full representation, is an Electoral System in which every vote counts equally in the overall outcome of the body or bodies of Representative s, creating a close match between the percentage of votes that Political Parties receive and the number of seats they obtain in Legislative Assemblies . In a jurisdiction with more than two parties, this system often results in Coalition governments in a body often called a Parliament . Some important distinctions of proportional representation are: a low threshold to elect a single representative, a government that reflects a true majority of the voters, an elected body that can be led by a minority government when needed (but only to the extent the majority allows it to lead) and, as already mentioned, full representation. Various forms of proportional representation exist, such as Party-list Proportional Representation , in which voters can vote for parties and, in open-list models, for one or more candidates on the list. Another kind of electoral system covered with the term proportional representation is the Single Transferable Vote (STV), which, in turn, does not depend on the existence of political parties. A distinction can be made for systems with a Single Non-transferable Vote and for Cumulative Voting , systems that are sometimes categorized as "semi-proportional". Some nations, like The Netherlands , combine all aspects, and is by many {Link without Title} considered to be the perfect form of proportional representation: the voters vote for a specific person who is then also part of a political affiliation, a term that covers either a single party or an affiliation for electoral purposes only of several parties. Most ''English'' speaking nations do not have proportional representation, except South Africa, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Sierra Leone, and Guyana. COALITION GOVERNMENTS What surprises people accustomed to district elections the most about proportional representation is that coalition governments can become normal. The majority of the elected body is always in control. Sometimes the coalition is a minority government but they must receive approval for their actions from the majority of the elected body. Minority governments are not the norm and newspapers around the world will report this unusual aspect. By contrast, governments of nations with single-seat district elections usually represent less than half the voters. The governmental election in that other well-known two-party nation — Britain — delivered in 2005, according to Nina Temple of the pressure group Make Votes Count, an "election result was really a travesty of democracy. For every person who voted Labour, two people voted for other parties and two people abstained and yet we have a [Labour majority government." Her comments and that of others can be read in the American British newspaper Union Jack of June 2005[http://www.localparty.org/UnionJack.html] 'Blair Under Pressure To Reform Britain's Voting System,' highlighting the desire for political reform in the UK, one of the very few nations in the world where only two parties governed in the last sixty years. NEW ZEALAND New Zealand has a system of proportional representation The United Nations Economic and Social Commission reported on New Zealand [http://www.unescap.org/huset/women/reports/index.htm that parliamentary elections "were held under a single member constituency First Past the Post system, i.e. single-seat district elections, until 1996 when following widespread dissatisfaction with the fairness of this electoral system and with political parties in general, a system of proportional representation — Mixed Member Proportional — was introduced. Under this system voters have two votes, one for an electorate MP and one for a party. There are 120 seats in New Zealand's parliament. After the 1999 general election 61 were electorate seats, 6 Maori seats and 53 party seats." Especially the jump of female representatives elected percentage-wise was stark (jump from 21% to 30% in one election). FULL REPRESENTATION/WINNER TAKES ALL Winner Takes All refers to the effect of single-seat district elections, where those not receiving the majority of the votes do not get their representative. The runner-up may receive up to 49.9% of the votes, but still not get the seat. Full Representation is a term often used to describe Proportional Represention, yet differs from that term in that it is a description of the emancipatory effect that is usually attributed to proportional representation. In the electoral system of proportional representation, political groups can emancipate within the system. Emancipation is the process of being able to participate and contribute, while being able to remain oneself without having to adjust to a larger more powerful group. Some nations with district elections indeed deliver this emancipatory effect of full representation to various political groups. Examples are Canada, with French-speaking Quebec, and Germany, for instance through the Green party; both nations with district elections give space to independently functioning political parties that represent very distinct parts within these nations, not forcing them to adhere to other overbearing parties. This aspect of emancipation stands in contrast to the political segments in some of the nations with a more pure form of district elections, such as, for instance, the christian coalition in the United States that finds its existence often politically confined within the Republican Party; in the United States and Great-Britain, only two parties have been in power over the last sixty years. The level of emancipation of specific groups may reach a high level, but never the highest level; they must exist within the framework of (one of) the two political parties. In general, third parties have mainly been unsuccessful in disturing the balance of the two parties. HISTORY The Proportional Representation system was devised in the late 19th Century , the brain-child of D'Hondt . Party-list proportional representation was first used in Belgium in the 1900 parliamentary elections and was implemented in many European countries during or after World War I . Single Transferable Vote was first used in Tasmania in 1907. Proportional representation is a much more common system of voting than the plurality voting system. All of the members of the European Parliament, or MEP s, including those elected from constituencies in Britain, are elected by proportional representation. Proportional representation is also used in many European countries. In general, first-past-the-post is only used in former British colonies, and in the Westminster Elections in the when New Zealand opted for Mixed Member Proportional Representation and the analysts conclude Canada is heading towards the same direction. Proportional representation does have some history in the between San Francisco and Rotterdam shows how emancipation and access are more entrenched in district elections. Some electoral systems incorporate additional features to ensure ''absolutely'' accurate or more comprehensive representation, based on gender or minority status (like ethnicity or race). Note that features such as this are not strictly part of proportional representation; depending on what kind of PR is used, people tend to be already represented proportionally according to these standards without such additional rules. In Ireland, proportional representation has resulted in a strange situation whereby a centre party with a large support base, known as Fianna Fáil , has 45% of the vote but the opposition parties are extremely fragmented with the only thing that unites them being their dislike of Fianna Fail. Therefore although people do want a strong alternative to Fianna Fail, they differ greatly on what form that should take, thus an extremely fragmented opposition vote. This has lead to a series of coalition governments in power. In his essay, ''Overcoming Practical Difficulties in Creating a World Parliamentary Assembly'', Joseph E. Schwartzberg proposes the use of proportional representation in the United Nations Parliamentary Assembly in order to prevent, for instance, lower castes of India ns from being excluded {Link without Title} : There are certain other Advantages To Proportional Representation . METHODS OF PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION There are different methods of proportional representation, which achieve either a greater degree of proportionality or a greater degree of determinate outcome. Party list system in a multi-member constituency The parties each list their candidates according to that party's determination of priorities. In a closed list, voters vote for a list, not a candidate. Each party is allocated seats in proportion to the number of votes, using the ranking order on its list. In an '''open list''', voters may vote, depending on the model, for one person, or for two, or indicate their order of preference within the list.
Additional-member system, mixed-member system ''Main articles: Additional Member System s - Mixed Member Proportional and Parallel Voting ; Alternative Vote and Alternative Vote Top-up
Single transferable vote in a multi-member constituency See Also: Single Transferable Vote A constituency elects at least three, rarely more than six representatives. Consequently the constituency is three to six times larger than a single member constituency in the plurality voting system. Parties tend to offer as many candidates as they most optimistically could expect to win: the major parties may nominate almost as many candidates as there are seats, while the minor parties and independents rather fewer. Voters mark their ballot, giving their preferred ranking for some or even all the candidates. Consequently, it is the voters, rather than the party, who have final say over which candidates succeed — some say it is not a good system for party Apparatchik s. A successful candidate must achieve a quota of one-fourth plus one of the preferences in a three-member constituency, one-fifth plus one in a four-member, and so on. Only in a few cases is this achieved at the first count. For the second count, if a candidate wins election his surplus vote, in excess of the quota, is transferred to his voters' second choices; otherwise, the least popular candidate is eliminated and his votes redistributed according to the second preference shown on them. This process continues for as many counts as are needed until all seats are filled. Although the counting process is complicated, voting is clear and most voters get at least one of their preferences elected. All deputies are answerable directly to their local constituents. Some political scientists argue that STV is more properly classified as 'semi-proportional' as there is no assurance of a proportional result at a nationwide level.
DISPROPORTIONALITY The constituency magnitude of a system is measured by the number of seats in a constituency, and plays a vital role in determining how proportional an electoral system can be. When using proportional systems, the greater the number of seats in a constituency, the more proportional it can be. Any system with single-member constituency is by necessity majoritarian - requirement of 50%''plus one'' at that level. However constituency borders may be Gerrymander ed to allow for simulation of proportionality at a higher level. This may be achieved by creating "majority-minority" constituencies - constituencies in which the majority is formed by a group of voters that are in the minority at a higher level. However, multiple-member districts do not ensure that an electoral system will be proportional. The Bloc Vote can result in "super-majoritarian" results in which, in addition to the normal disproportionality of single-member majoritarian systems, geographical variations that could create majority-minority districts become subsumed into the larger districts. There is also another cause of disproportionality within some proportional systems. This is when the party does not provide a list with enough people on it to fill all the seats won by a political party. For instance if a party wins 20 seats but only has 15 people on its list then it loses 5 seats. This is termed an Underhang . Some proportional systems deliberately limit the amount of proportionality by requiring a party list to achieve the Election Threshold - a certain minimum percentage of votes to receive any seats. Typically, this lower limit is set at between two and five percent of the total number of votes cast. Parties who do not reach that margin will not be represented in parliament, making majorities, coalitions and thus governments easier to achieve. Proponents of election thresholds argue that they discourage Disproportionate Power what they may see as extremist parties - that are likely to be small. Opponents of thresholds argue that they cause so-called "proportional" systems to unfairly distribute the representation of the supporters of minor parties to the major parties, thus giving the parties which cross the threshold disproportionally high percentages of the seats and creating the possibility that a party or group of parties will assume control of the legislature without gaining a majority of votes. There are several ways of measuring proportionality, the most common being the Gallagher Index . FURTHER READING
SEE ALSO
EXTERNAL LINKS
|