The electoral system is a special political institution characterized by a set of rules and norms on the basis of which the relationship between the legislative and executive branches of government is determined and their legitimacy is achieved or withdrawn. The electoral system through elections makes it possible to form a certain type of organization of power, to ensure the participation of society in the formation government agencies authorities. Successful implementation elections and recognition of their results by the majority of society is an important feature of this society to solve existing problems through peaceful political means.
The most important components of the electoral system are voting rights and the electoral process.
Electoral law is a set of legal norms on the procedure for elections, which includes the political right of citizens to vote (active right) and to be elected (passive right), as well as electoral laws and other acts regulating the election process. The electoral process as a complex of actions in the organization and implementation of elections is a practical-organizational component of the electoral system, is based on electoral law and consists of several sequential stages (setting an election date, education constituencies and polling stations, formation of election commissions, nomination and registration of candidates, voting and determination of its results).
In the practice of modern democratic states, there are national parliamentary and presidential elections; elections to regional authorities and local government.
Types of Electoral Systems
IN modern Russia Depending on the level of government being formed, majoritarian, proportional or mixed electoral systems are used.
(1) the majoritarian electoral system is based on the majority principle, i.e. The winner is the candidate who receives the majority of votes. The majority of votes can be absolute (50% + 1 vote) and relative (more than the opponent). The absolute majority majority system, if none of the candidates received an absolute majority of votes, involves a second round of voting, where the two candidates who received a relative majority of votes advance.
The President of Russia is elected by majoritarian system absolute majority. The heads of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation have been elected using the same system since 1991, with a break from 2005 to 2011. In 2012, according to the Federal Law of May 2, 2012 No. 40-FZ “On Amendments to the federal law“On the general principles of organization of legislative (representative) and executive bodies state power subjects Russian Federation“” and the Federal Law “On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in Referendums of Citizens of the Russian Federation” direct elections of heads of regions of the Russian Federation were returned. On April 2, 2013, on the initiative of President V.V. Putin, amendments were made to the Law giving the subjects of the federation the right to replace popular elections of their heads with voting in parliament on several candidates.
(2) the proportional electoral system involves the distribution of seats in parliament in accordance with the number of votes received in the elections according to party lists: each party receives a strictly defined number of seats in parliament, which is the sum of the number of mandates it received in each electoral district.
In Russia, such a system worked during the formation of the State Duma and regional parliaments from 2007 to 2011.
The 2007 State Duma elections were the first in which a proportional system was used. In addition, the electoral threshold for parties was raised from 5% to 7%; the lower turnout threshold and the ability to vote “against everyone” were removed; parties were prohibited from uniting into party blocs.
The 2011 State Duma elections were the first and last in which parties that received from 5 to 6% of the votes received one mandate in the chamber, and those that received from 6 to 7% received two mandates. However, none of the parties was able to show a similar result. At the same time, all four parties that were represented in the lower house of the Parliament of the fifth convocation (Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, United Russia, A Just Russia) retained their representation in the State Duma of the sixth convocation. However, no other party entered the federal parliament.
(3) a proportional-majoritarian or mixed electoral system involves a combination of two types of systems in elections to a specific government body.
During the elections to the State Duma of 1993, 1995, 1999, 2003. 225 deputies were elected according to a proportional system in a single federal district with a threshold of 5%, the other 225 deputies were elected in single-mandate districts (majority system of a relative majority).
The 2016 State Duma elections will again be held under a mixed system: one half of the deputies (225) will be elected in single-mandate districts using a majoritarian system of relative majority, the other half will be elected in a single electoral district using a proportional system with a 5% barrier. At least one electoral district will be formed on the territory of each subject of the Russian Federation; if necessary (in densely populated regions), there will be more districts (Federal Law dated February 22, 2014 No. 20-FZ “On the election of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation”).
According to current legislation, parties that have entered parliament will be able to nominate their candidates in the Russian presidential elections without collecting signatures. At the same time, all parties that received at least 3% of the votes in the elections will have a number of state benefits and privileges: direct admission to the next elections to the State Duma and elections to legislative (representative) bodies of state power in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, which will take place no later than next elections to the State Duma; reimbursement of all expenses for the past elections and increased financial support until the next elections.
Single voting day
The peculiarity of the electoral system in a particular country also concerns voting day. As a rule, two main approaches are used when setting a voting day - either elections are scheduled for any day (usually a weekend) when the powers of the relevant body or official expire (in the case early termination powers, there is a separate procedure established by the constitution and laws of the country), or a single voting day.
For example, in the USSR, elections to the Councils of People's Deputies (except for the Supreme Council of the USSR) were held simultaneously - in March. Elections in post-Soviet Russia various levels were not synchronized. As a result, a situation of “permanent elections” developed in the country - practically every Sunday elections at the regional or local level were held in one of the regions.
In 2004, changes were made to the electoral legislation, according to which a single voting day was introduced for elections at the regional and local levels - the first or second Sunday of March. Moreover, in some cases it was allowed to schedule elections on the first or second Sunday of October, or simultaneously with elections to the State Duma, and in exceptional cases - on any day. Moreover, the elections of the President of Russia, starting from 2000, were held in March. And elections to the State Duma, starting from 1993, are in December. However, they were not strictly tied to a single voting day. These deadlines could be shifted in the event of early termination of the powers of the President of Russia or the dissolution of the State Duma.
Since 2013, elections have been held on the second Sunday of September. On September 14, 2014, election campaigns at various levels were held, including elections of heads of 30 constituent entities of the Russian Federation (11 planned and 19 early) and elections of deputies of legislative bodies of state power in 14 constituent entities of the Russian Federation. On September 13, 2015, elections were held at various levels, including elections of heads of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (10 regular, including elections through the parliaments of the constituent entities, and 14 early) and elections of deputies of legislative bodies of state power in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. However, this practice (voting on Sunday in early September) shows that at this time of year many voters do not physically reach polling stations, since many are still on vacation. Therefore, there was a need for adjustment one day voting. At the moment, this issue is being actively discussed in the legislative and executive authorities of the Russian Federation.
CLASSIFICATION OF ELECTIONS
If we take as the initial basis of classification separation of powers , then we can distinguish elections to legislative, executive and judicial authorities. Elections to legislative bodies - parliaments, meetings of representatives, dumas, etc. characteristic of most countries with a democratic system. They also use the principle of electing executive leaders: governors and the president in the USA, the president and prefects in France, the president of the federation, presidents of autonomous republics and heads of regions in Russia. In some countries, the principle of election is used to select representatives of the judiciary: judges, lay judges, and sworn attorneys. But often their election is replaced by appointment, sometimes for life, to ensure the independence and political invulnerability of judges.
In accordance with territorial representation we can highlight elections to state (federal) authorities (parliament, president); to regional authorities (governors, deputies of land, regional, regional and other territorial authorities); elections to local (municipal) authorities or local self-government bodies (burgomasters, mayors, heads of administrations, deputies of assemblies, dumas, councils, etc.). Elections of deputies to international bodies, for example, to the European Parliament, are one of the types of territorial representation.
IN scientific literature The term “electoral system”, including in Russian jurisprudence, is usually used in two meanings - broad and narrow.
In a broad sense, an electoral system is a system public relations related to elections of public authorities. It is obvious that the electoral system in such a broad sense is regulated not only by legal norms. The scope of these relations is very wide. It includes questions and definitions of the circle of voters and those elected, and the infrastructure of elections (the creation of electoral units, electoral bodies, etc.), and the relations that develop at each stage of the electoral process until its completion. The electoral system is regulated by the norms of electoral law, understood as a system of legal norms, which is a subbranch of constitutional (state) law. However, not the entire electoral system is regulated by legal norms. It also includes relations regulated by corporate norms (statutes of political public associations, etc.), as well as by the customs and traditions of a given society.
However, people are more interested in the electoral system in the so-called narrow sense. This is a way of determining which of the candidates who stood is elected to office or as a deputy. Depending on which electoral system is used, the election results for the same voting results may turn out to be completely different. Therefore, political forces often fight among themselves for an electoral system that is more advantageous to them (however, when assessing its advantage, they may be mistaken).
Some authors, rightly noting that each concept should be used in only one sense, propose to abandon the use of the term “electoral system” in a narrow sense, replacing it with “a method of determining voting results.” However, it seems that such a replacement is not justified. After all, this concept is not limited to the method of determining the voting results, but in fact represents a system of the most important legal norms. In addition, this term is adopted in foreign literature, and abandoning it will complicate the mutual understanding of Russian and foreign legal scholars.
If we try to define the term “electoral system”, abstracting from its meaning in a narrow or broad sense, then, apparently, the electoral system should be understood as a set of rules, techniques, procedures, processes and institutions that ensure the legitimate formation of elected bodies of state power and local self-government based on adequate representation of the diverse interests of civil society.
There is no doubt that the electoral system, like component political system, itself, like any system, is divided into structural components, of which the most common are electoral law - the theoretical-legal component and the electoral procedure (or electoral process) - the practical-organizational component.
Electoral law is a set of legal norms regulating the participation of citizens in elections, their organization and conduct, the relationship between voters and elected bodies or officials, as well as the procedure for recalling elected representatives who have not met the trust of voters. This term can also be used in another, narrower meaning, namely as the right of a citizen to participate in elections, both as a voter (active suffrage) and as an elected person (passive suffrage).
The electoral procedure constitutes the practical-organizational part of the electoral system. It includes state measures to organize and conduct elections, namely: calling elections; creation of electoral bodies responsible for their conduct; organization of electoral districts, districts, precincts; registration of candidates for deputies; some financial support for elections; maintaining order during their implementation; determination of voting results.
Unlike many foreign constitutions, the Russian Constitution does not contain a special chapter on electoral rights.
The currently existing electoral systems, with all their diversity and diversity, can be reduced to three types:
Majoritarian;
Proportional;
Mixed representation.
Each electoral system is largely determined by the existing political system in a particular country.
Majoritarian system(from the French majorite - majority) currently operates in the UK, USA, Canada, Ireland, France, Japan. In a majoritarian system, the winner is the candidate or list of candidates who receives the statutory majority of votes. Modern states use majoritarian systems
A) absolute majority (Ireland, Australia);
B) relative majority (USA, UK, India).
Under a majoritarian system of absolute majority the one who received an absolute (or simple) majority of votes (i.e. 50% + 1 vote) from total number votes cast and declared valid. If none of the candidates received the required number of votes, a re-balloting is carried out, and 2 candidates who received greatest number votes, or a second round of voting is held, the results of which may be determined by another system. Moreover, in the interval between rounds, several parties can unite around one candidate and create a single election bloc. In a multi-party system, the second round is decisive in such a system.
Under a majoritarian system of relative majority The one who gets more votes than each of his opponents individually is considered elected. Under this system, a party that does not have the support of a majority of voters often gets a majority in parliament. For example, imagine that 5 thousand voters must choose one of five candidates. Let's assume that the votes are distributed in this way: 2000-1500-1000-450-50. The first candidate will be recognized as elected, despite the fact that the majority of voters (3000 people) voted against him. There is a rarely used type of majority system - qualified majority. To win, you need to get 2/3, ¾ of the total number of votes cast.
Depending on the number of deputies elected from each district, the majoritarian uninominal, or single-member(1 deputy from the district) system and polynomial, or multi-mandate(several deputies from the district).
The main advantage of the majoritarian electoral system is that it takes into account the opinions of the majority of voters in a particular district; the disadvantage is that it does not take into account the opinions of the majority as a whole, when specifically forming electoral districts.
Thus, main problem in elections under the majoritarian system is the formation of electoral districts. There are detailed procedures, sometimes legislated, requiring respect for the integrity of districts and other rules regarding their geometry and boundaries, amounting to following criteria:
1.Constitutional a) equality of districts in terms of population; b) equality of opportunity to be represented in elections (prevention of cuts for the purpose of discrimination separate groups);
2.Geographical compactness of the districts' territory and their territorial integrity;
3.Political-geographical criteria: compliance, if possible, with the boundaries of political and administrative units reflecting the territorial organization of society;
4.Political: a) continuity of district grids after an audit as a result of revision based on population census data, minimizing changes made; b) “non-partisanship” of the districts, i.e. preventing the division of districts in the interests of the party in power.
If these criteria conflict with each other, preference is given to the constitutional and geographical criteria.
Such rules are important, since the division of districts can become effective way manipulation of votes. If you know well the placement of various social groups, that is, the political geography of society, then it is possible to cut the grid of districts in such a way as to radically reduce the political influence of some groups on the election results, in favor of other groups. Such manipulations were called “jerremiedering” - after the Governor of Massachusetts E. Jerry, who at the beginning of the 19th century. whimsically carved out districts to ensure the victory of his supporters.
One of the advantages of the majoritarian electoral system is the emergence of strong, direct connections between deputies and voters, often of a personal nature. A conscientious deputy knows his district well, the problems and interests of its residents. Voters have a fairly complete understanding of the candidate, his political views, and behavior. The majoritarian electoral system strengthens the position of the strongest political movement, creates conditions for the emergence of a stable balance of power in legislative bodies, helping to oust small and medium-sized parties from parliamentary structures, stimulating the consciousness of two- or two-party modified systems.
The disadvantages of the majoritarian electoral system are that it often does not reflect the real balance of socio-political forces in the country. Some influential political parties and organizations are being pushed out of parliament, which can lead to the intensification of extra-parliamentary methods of political struggle. Thus, an opportunity is created for private interests to dominate the behavior of political subjects to the detriment of national interests; the importance of parliament and government as national bodies is weakened.
Proportional representation system- this is the procedure for determining the voting results, in which the distribution of mandates between parties that nominated their candidates to the representative body is carried out in accordance with the number of votes they received. The proportional system has the following modifications:
· a proportional system at the national level, when electoral districts are not separated, and voters vote for political parties throughout the country;
· proportional system in multi-member districts, when voters vote for party representatives throughout the district, while seats in parliament are distributed depending on the influence of the party in the district.
Under this system, large electoral districts are created in which each party nominates its own list of candidates, and the voter casts his vote for the list of the corresponding party. To determine the voting results, a so-called electoral meter or quota is established, that is, the minimum votes required to obtain one deputy mandate. The distribution within the party list is carried out in accordance with the order in which the candidates are located on the list (so-called linked lists).
The proportional system does not have the shortcomings of the majoritarian system, and allows the opinions of voters in the country as a whole to be taken into account to a greater extent. As a result, when making parliamentary decisions, the interests of individual social and political groups are taken into account to a greater extent. The proportional system promotes the creation of effective feedback between civil society and the state, stimulating the development of pluralism in the political system. However, it also distorts the will of citizens, especially when large quantities electoral associations, or small government bodies. Negative quality Another advantage of the proportional system is that lists of candidates are sometimes compiled through administrative and clerical means, which increases the dependence of candidates on party apparatuses. There is a possibility of bureaucratic decisions and machinations that undermine the population's trust in representative bodies and political parties. The absence of a dominant political party makes the emergence of a coalition of parties inevitable. Their political programs suffer from uncertainty, since they are created on the basis of compromises between parties with different goals. Such compromises are fragile, and therefore government actions can be inconsistent and contradictory. Parliamentary instability may arise.
To overcome the shortcomings of the majoritarian and proportional electoral systems, various kinds mixed electoral systems. On a national scale, a system is being created in which part of the parliamentary mandates is won on the basis of the principles of the majoritarian system, and the other part is distributed depending on voting on party lists. For example, in Germany, half of the Bundestag deputies are elected using a majoritarian system, and half using a proportional system. Each voter has two votes. He submits the first for a candidate, the second for a particular party list. The votes are counted separately. Elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation were held in the same way. 225 deputies are elected through single-mandate majoritarian districts, 225 through party lists.
Since 2007 deputies State Duma elected according to a proportional system (party lists). Since 2005, the entry barrier has been increased to 7%. New rules were established specifically in order to cut off clearly unfavorable parties and undesirable candidates for the State Duma.
In a mixed electoral system, electoral legislation defines a lower limit for limiting the representation of small parties. For example, both here and in Germany, parties that receive less than 5% of the votes in the country as a whole do not enter parliament.
TYPES OF VOTE.
Suffrage involves determining the type of voting (voting) during elections, i.e. regulation of the main procedure of the election campaign. There are three main types of voting:
1.Alternative: an active voter has one vote, which he can cast for or against a specific candidate or electoral association (party).
2.Cumulative: voters have more votes than the number of registered candidates. He has the right to give all his votes to one candidate (bloc, party) or distribute them in a certain proportion according to his sympathies.
3.Limited: assumes that a voter has fewer votes than registered candidates. The voter has the same rights as in cumulative voting. Sometimes the so-called preferential voting is used (from the Latin praefero - I prefer). Then the voter puts his preferences on the ballot, indicating them with the numbers 1,2,3, etc. who he wants to see first, who second, etc. When determining the voting results, the initial votes received by candidates at the first preference, etc. are counted. Such voting under a majoritarian system of absolute majority ensures the effectiveness of elections and eliminates the need for a second round or re-balloting. With a proportional system, this helps determine those party list candidates who are entitled to a mandate (in Austria, Finland).
given results.
§2. Types of electoral systems
The concept of the electoral system
The electoral law of each country establishes a certain system of representation. The electoral system is a set of rules, principles and techniques established by law, with the help of which voting results are determined and deputy mandates are distributed.
The functioning of any electoral system can only be assessed in relation to the form of government, the political culture of the country, and the nature of its political parties. Therefore, electoral laws cease to meet their goals as other institutions of society and the state change. It is no coincidence that in the context of major social changes, the electoral system also changes. Thus, the electoral system has changed in Russia, the electoral system is being reformed in Italy, and electoral laws have changed in Belarus and other post-Soviet republics.
The choice of one or another electoral system entails significant changes in the balance of political forces. Thus, in France, the electoral law became the object of a fierce political struggle and was significantly changed several times depending on the existing balance of political forces. The American system corresponds to the nature of the watershed between the main trends and parties that has developed there and contributes to its preservation and even deepening. The Italian (proportional) system takes into account the more diverse political world of this country, although it no longer fully corresponds to the current balance of political forces, which necessitates reform of the electoral system.
Thus, the electoral system in each country is created depending on how they understand the interests of their party and society, what are the political traditions and culture. Therefore, politicians tend to be cautious about changes to election legislation. Violation of the balance of power in a stable society always leads to unpredictable consequences and can destabilize political life.
There are a large number of electoral systems in the world, but their diversity can be reduced to the following three types: majoritarian, proportional, mixed.
Majority system of absolute majority
This type of electoral system is based on the principle of the majority in determining the voting results (French majorité - majority). The candidate who receives the established majority of votes is considered elected.
There are two types of majoritarian systems: absolute majority and relative majority. In the first case, the candidate who collects an absolute majority of votes – 50 percent plus one vote – is considered elected. Due to the fact that it is not always possible for any of the candidates to collect more than half of the votes in the first round, a second round of elections has to be held. This practice has developed, for example, in France, where all candidates from the first round are allowed to participate in the second round, with the exception of those who received less than 12.5 percent of the votes. The one who gets more votes than any of the opponents is considered elected in the second round.
Belarus also uses an absolute majority system. Unlike France, in the second round, if the first was inconclusive, two candidates who scored greatest number votes. The one who received the greater number of votes is considered elected, provided that the number of votes cast for the candidate is greater than the number of votes cast against him. For an election to be valid, at least 50 percent of a given county's registered voters must participate.
As a rule, elections under the majoritarian system of absolute majority contribute to the formation of relatively stable party blocs, excluding the influence of small, fragmented parties. As a result, a system of large and, very importantly, interdependent political parties is formed. For example, in France, where this system has been used with a short break for more than 30 years, there are more than eight parties that actually compete for votes. In the first round, parties that are close in ideology go separately; the second round forces them to unite and confront a common rival.
One of the options for the absolute majority majority system is to hold elections with preferential voting. The voter receives a ballot with a list of candidates, in which he allocates seats at his discretion. If none of the candidates receives an absolute majority, then the votes cast for the candidate in last place are transferred to the more successful ones, and he himself is excluded from the electoral list. And this continues until one of the candidates receives the required majority of votes. This system is good because a second round of elections is not required.
Majority system of relative majority
In elections under a majoritarian system of relative majority (plural electoral system), in order to win, a candidate only needs to get more votes than any of his competitors, and not necessarily more than half. Electoral districts, as under the absolute majority system, are, as a rule, single-member, that is, only one deputy is elected from each district. Moreover, if a citizen managed to achieve only his nomination as a candidate, he would automatically become a deputy without voting. With this system, the winner only needs one vote, which he can cast for himself.
The majority system is currently used in Great Britain and countries that were once under its influence, including the United States. Thus, the territory of the United States is divided into 435 congressional districts. In each district, citizens elect one deputy to the lower house (House of Representatives), who must receive a simple majority of the votes. Votes cast for losing candidates are not counted and do not affect the distribution of congressional seats.
The political consequence of the application of the majoritarian system of relative majority is bipartisanship, that is, the presence in the country of two largest political parties constantly alternating in power. This is not so bad for the country and the stability of its political system. Bipartisanship forces parties to take a more responsible approach to solving government problems, because the winning party is given full control, and the losing one automatically becomes the opposition, criticizing the government. It is clear that it is the ruling party that bears and full responsibility for the policy being pursued.
Advantages and disadvantages of majoritarian systems
The main advantage of majoritarian representation is that it takes into account the opinions of the majority of voters in a particular district when forming government bodies. Elections under a majoritarian system predetermine the dominance of several large parties that can form stable governments, which contributes to the stability of the political system of society as a whole.
The advantages of the majoritarian system entail its disadvantages, being their continuation. The main disadvantage of this system is that it does not fully express the political will of the population. Almost 49 percent of the votes may be lost, not taken into account, unless, of course, there is an overwhelming majority of the winning party. This violates the principle of universal suffrage, since votes cast for defeated candidates are lost. Voters who voted for them are deprived of the opportunity to nominate their representatives to elected bodies. Thus, an elementary calculation shows that in Belarus, in order to be elected, a candidate only needs to receive 26 percent of the votes, because if a little more than 50 percent of voters come to the polling stations and a little more than half of them vote for the candidate, then as a result he will receive only a quarter of the votes voters. The interests of the remaining 74 percent will not be represented in the elected body.
The majoritarian system does not provide an adequate relationship between the support a party receives in the country and the number of its representatives in parliament. A small party with a majority in a few constituencies will win a few seats, while a large party spread across the country will win no seats even though more voters have voted for it. A quite typical situation is when parties gain approximately the same number of votes, but receive different numbers of parliamentary mandates. In other words, the majoritarian system does not raise the question of how fully the political composition of the elected authorities corresponds to the political sympathies of the population. This is the prerogative of the proportional electoral system.
Proportional system
The main difference between a proportional system and a majoritarian system is that it is not based on the majority principle, but on the principle of proportionality between the votes received and the mandates won. Deputy mandates are distributed not between individual candidates, but between parties in accordance with the number of votes cast for them. At the same time, not one, but several members of parliament are elected from the constituency. Voters vote for party lists, in fact for one program or another. Of course, parties try to include the most famous and authoritative people on their lists, but this does not change the principle itself.
Party lists can be various types. Some countries, for example, Spain, Greece, Portugal, Israel, Costa Rica, adhere to the rules of closed or rigid lists. Voters have the right to choose only a party, voting for the entire list. If, for example, there are seven candidates on the list, and the party won three seats, then the first three candidates on the list will become deputies. This option strengthens the power of the party elite, the top, since it is the party leaders who decide who will take first place on the list.
In a number of countries, another option is used - an open list system. Voters vote for the list, but they can change the places of candidates on it and express their preference (preference) for a certain candidate or candidates. An open list allows voters to change the order of the list of candidates compiled by party elites. The preferential method is used in Belgium and Italy. In the Netherlands, Denmark, and Austria, a semi-rigid list system is used, in which the first place won by a party is assigned to the candidate number one. The remaining mandates are distributed among candidates depending on the preferences they receive.
There is another unusual shape list, called panning (mixing). This system, used in Switzerland and Luxembourg, allows a voter to vote for a certain number of candidates belonging to different party lists. In other words, a voter has the right to give preference to candidates of different parties - mixed preference. This creates favorable opportunities for the formation of pre-election party blocs.
To determine the voting results, a quota is established, that is, the minimum votes required to elect one deputy. To determine the quota, the total number of votes cast in a given district (country) is divided by the number of deputy seats. Seats are distributed between parties by dividing the votes they receive by a quota.
In a number of countries with a proportional system, there is a so-called electoral threshold. In order to be represented in parliament, a party must receive at least a certain percentage of the votes and overcome a certain threshold. In Russia, Germany (mixed systems), and Italy it is 5 percent. In Hungary and Bulgaria - 4 percent, in Turkey - 10 percent, in Denmark - 2 percent. Parties that do not pass this threshold do not receive a single seat in parliament.
Advantages and disadvantages of the proportional system
The popularity of the proportional electoral system is evidenced by the fact that ten out of twelve EU countries (the exceptions are the UK and France) use this system. It largely defines modern Western European democracy as party democracy. The proportional system is the most democratic, allowing the political sympathies of the population to be taken into account. It stimulates a multi-party system, creates favorable conditions for the activities of small political parties.
At the same time, a continuation of the mentioned advantages of the proportional system are its disadvantages. In a multi-party environment, when about a dozen or even more parties are represented in parliament, it is difficult to form a government, which, as a rule, is unstable. Thus, during the post-war years in Italy, where the combination of a multi-party system and proportionality received full expression, about fifty governments changed. For 50 years, Italy has lived without a government for more than four years, which, of course, weakens the effectiveness of democracy.
The proportional system does not allow the voter to evaluate the personal merits of the candidate, since he chooses not a person, but a party, although to some extent this contradiction is eliminated by the method of preferences. In addition, the role of small parties may significantly increase, which, in exchange for supporting larger parties, demand posts and privileges that do not correspond to their real place in the political system. This creates conditions for corruption, degeneration of parties, merging of parties with the state apparatus, defections from camp to camp, struggle for warm places, etc. The very principle of proportionality is violated.
Mixed electoral systems
The mixed system of representation combines the advantages and disadvantages of both systems - majoritarian and proportional. The degree of efficiency of a public authority elected under a mixed system depends on the nature of the combination of majoritarian and proportional elements in it.
Elections are held on this basis in Russia and Germany. In Germany, for example, one half of the Bundestag deputies are elected according to a majority system of relative majority, the other - according to proportional majority. Every voter in this country has two votes. He casts one vote for a candidate elected under a majoritarian system, and the second vote for a party list. When summing up the results, both the first and second votes of voters are counted separately. The representation of any party consists of the sum of majoritarian and proportional mandates. The elections take place in one round. The five percent electoral threshold prevents small parties from winning seats in parliament. Under such a system, the majority of mandates go to large parties, even with a slight preponderance of forces in most constituencies. This allows the formation of a fairly stable government.
Concepts of the role of a deputy
In the practical implementation of various electoral systems, the political culture of the population and the deputy corps itself plays a huge role. Important also has an established understanding of the role of the deputy and his functions. The most common concepts and views on the role of a deputy include the following:
The deputy represents his party in parliament, defends and explains its political program;
The deputy represents, first of all, those voters who voted for him and his program;
A deputy represents in parliament all voters of his district, including those who voted against or abstained. It protects the general social, economic and political interests of the district;
A deputy at all levels expresses and protects the interests of the nation, the country as a whole, and each social group.
Highly qualified, honest work of people's representatives at all levels of government makes it possible to neutralize the negative aspects of the electoral system. Of course, a politician in parliament must proceed from the interests of the entire country and find the optimal degree of combination of the interests of the region and the country. It is necessary to strive to ensure that the relationship between people's representatives and voters is based on authority and trust.
The electoral system is a set of principles, methods and methods established by law for counting votes and determining voting results.
In foreign countries there are two main “classical” electoral systems: majoritarian and proportional, as well as a derivative of them - a mixed electoral system.
The majoritarian electoral system (from the French majorite - majority) is a system for determining voting results based on the majority principle. The candidate who receives the majority of votes is considered elected. There are majoritarian electoral systems of relative, absolute and qualified majority.
A majoritarian electoral system of a relative majority is characterized by:
1) electoral districts, as a rule, are single-member;
2) a threshold for mandatory voter participation is not established; elections are considered valid for any voter turnout (even one voter);
3) the candidate is elected with the least number of votes, because a candidate who simply receives more votes than other candidates is considered elected;
Majoritarian electoral system relative
majority is always effective, but unrepresentative. Applied in the UK, USA, India and many other countries of the Anglo-Saxon legal system.
The majoritarian electoral system of the absolute majority is distinguished by the fact that:
1) establishes a mandatory threshold for voter participation and, as a consequence, if it is not reached, the elections are declared invalid;
2) a candidate who receives more than half of the votes of voters who took part in the elections is considered elected (minimum - 50% + 1 vote);
3) involves a system of repeated voting rounds;
5) also, but to a lesser extent, distorts the true picture of voting;
6) in the second round, it is allowed to determine the voting results according to the rules of relative majority - to be elected, a candidate only needs to receive a number of votes that exceeds the number of votes received by other candidates. The majoritarian electoral system of the absolute majority is quite representative, but not always effective. Widespread in the states of the Romano-Germanic legal system.
To be elected under the qualified majority majoritarian electoral system, a majority exceeding the absolute is required, i.e. 2/3, 3/4, 60-65% of the votes. This system is highly representative, but ineffective. Rarely used (in Italy it existed until 1993, in Chile).
A proportional electoral system is a system for determining voting results, based on the principle of proportionality between the number of votes cast for a political party and the number of deputy mandates it receives. In a proportional electoral system, the voter votes for the list of candidates of a political party as a whole, and not for a specific candidate. The proportional electoral system is based on an electoral quota, i.e. the smallest number of votes required to elect one deputy. The electoral quota is determined various methods: by the method of T. Heir, Hohenbach-Bischof, X. Drupp, by the method of divisors - V. d'Ondt, Saint-Lague, Imperialli and others.
Hare's method is a natural quota (named after its author, Thomas Hare, an English barrister highly qualified), proposed by him in 1855) is calculated by dividing the total number of votes cast for the lists of all political parties in a given electoral district by the number of deputy mandates to be elected in the district. The electoral quota calculated in this way is imposed on the number of popular votes received by each party. How many times the electoral quota will fit into the number of votes cast for each party will determine the number of parliamentary seats won by it.
The quota using the Hare method is determined by:
Q=X/Y
where Q is the electoral quota; X is the total number of votes cast for all political parties in the district; Y - number of deputies to be elected in the district.
Let us assume that in an electoral district from which 7 deputies are to be elected, lists of five parties are running. The votes were distributed: party A - 65 thousand votes, party B - 75 thousand, B - 95 thousand, D - 110 thousand, D - 30 thousand. In total, thus, 375 thousand votes were cast (65 + 75 +9 5 + 110 + 30).
A - 65 thousand: 53.6 thousand = 1 mandate and 11.4 thousand votes remaining;
B - 75 thousand: 53.6 thousand = 1 mandate and 21.4 thousand votes remaining;
B - 95 thousand: 53.6 thousand = 1 mandate and the balance is 41.4 thousand votes;
G - 110 thousand: 53.6 thousand = 2 mandates and 2.8 thousand votes remaining;
D - 30 thousand: 53.6 thousand = 0 mandates and 30 thousand votes remaining.
As a result, 5 deputy mandates were distributed. 2 mandates remained undistributed. 107 thousand votes in the remainder (11.4 thousand + 21.4 thousand + 41.4 thousand + 2.8 thousand + 30 thousand) are lost.
The remaining mandates are distributed using additional rules.
The largest remainder rule, in which undistributed mandates go to parties with the largest unused vote balances. In our example, the remaining two mandates go to parties B and D.
The rule of the largest number of voters - mandates not distributed under the quota are transferred to the parties that receive the largest number of votes. In our example, the remaining two mandates go to parties B and D.
Hohenbach-Bischoff method - artificial quota is determined by dividing the total number of votes by the number of mandates plus 1:
Q = X / (Y+1)
The point of this method is to reduce the quota and gain the opportunity to distribute a larger number of deputy mandates.
In our example, the total number of votes cast and recognized as valid, 375 thousand, is divided not by 7, but by 8.
Q = 375 thousand: 8 = 46.87 thousand - the required quota according to the Hohenbach-Bischoff method. Mandates, according to this quota, were distributed as follows:
A - 65 thousand: 46.87 = 1 mandate (balance 18.13 thousand);
B - 75 thousand: 46.87 = 1 mandate (balance 28.13 thousand);
B - 95 thousand: 46.87 = 2 mandates (remainder 1.26 thousand);
G - 110 thousand: 46.87 = 2 mandates (remainder 16.26 thousand);
D - 30 thousand: 46.87 = 0 mandates (balance 30 thousand).
As a result, 6 deputy mandates were distributed, 1 mandate remained undistributed. To distribute it, additional rules are used.
The d'Hondt method - a method for distributing mandates in elections using a system of proportional representation, was proposed in the 19th century by the Belgian mathematician Professor Victor d'Hondt. In accordance with this system, the number of votes received by each party list is divided sequentially by a series of numbers (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc.) to a figure corresponding to the number of party lists. Then the resulting quotients are distributed in descending order. Private, serial number which corresponds to the number of mandates to be filled in the electoral district, is a common divisor. Each party list receives as many seats as common divisor fits into the number of votes received by this list.
Advantages of this system:
Always gives accurate results;
- mandates are distributed the first time;
- no problems with leftovers.
In addition to the D'Hondt method, various varieties of it are used.
The Imperialli method involves dividing by a successive series of even numbers, starting with 2. This method works in favor of the major political parties.
The Sainte-Lagué method involves dividing the total number of votes received by parties by an odd series of numbers. The d'Hondt method and its variants are used in Belgium, Finland, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Bulgaria and a number of other countries.
To avoid the unwanted political fragmentation of parliamentary chambers, which is generated by the proportional election system, a so-called barrier clause has been introduced in a number of countries.
Barrier clause (barrier, barrage clause) - legislatively established rule, according to which prerequisite Participation of a party in the distribution of mandates is the receipt of at least a certain percentage of votes. Only on condition that the party and its candidates have received this minimum of votes is it allowed to participate in the distribution of deputy mandates according to the proportional system. If a party does not receive this minimum number of votes, it is excluded from participation in the distribution of deputy seats, and the votes cast for it are not taken into account. The barrier clause is different in the electoral laws of foreign countries: 1% - in Israel, 2% - in Denmark, 2.5% - in Albania, Sri Lanka, 3% - in Argentina, Spain, 4% - in Bulgaria, Hungary, Sweden , Italy (since 1993), 5% - in Germany, Lithuania (since 1996), Kyrgyzstan, 8% - in Egypt, 10% - in Turkey. The establishment of a barrier point is motivated by the desire to create conditions for efficient work parliament.
After determining the number of mandates won by each party, the question of which of the candidates on the party list will be awarded a deputy mandate is decided.
In foreign countries there are several approaches to solving this issue:
System of linked (rigid) lists - mandates are received by candidates who are in first place on the party list in a number equal to the number of mandates received by the party. Each voter can vote only for one or another list as a whole, while the candidates whose names appear first on it are considered elected for each list, in the number of seats in the elected body that party received;
The free list system involves preferential voting. Each voter expresses his attitude towards individual candidates on his chosen list. The voter puts down the numbers 1, 2, 3, etc. next to the names of the candidates, thereby indicating the desired order in which the candidates receive mandates. Those elected from this party will be the candidates who received the largest number of first or close to them preferences;
The system of semi-linked (semi-rigid) lists is one of the methods for distributing deputy mandates within a party list under a proportional electoral system. According to the semi-linked list system, the candidate in first place on the party list (usually the party leader) always receives a deputy mandate, the remaining deputy seats are distributed based on preferences (personal preferences of voters). Used in Austria, Belgium, Denmark.
If during the elections of the same representative body (house of parliament) different electoral systems are used (combined), then we are talking about a mixed electoral system. Its use is usually dictated by the desire to combine the advantages various systems and, if possible, eliminate or compensate for their shortcomings. Depending on the relationship between the elements of majoritarian and proportional electoral systems, mixed electoral systems can be symmetrical or asymmetrical.
When using a symmetrical mixed system, half of the members of parliament are elected by a majoritarian system, and half by a proportional system. Both systems have the same influence on the formation of parliament. A similar procedure is used in the formation of the German Bundestag.
An asymmetric mixed system assumes an unequal ratio of elements of the majoritarian and proportional systems. For example, the Chamber of Deputies - the lower house of the Italian parliament - includes 630 deputies, of which 475 are elected by a majoritarian system, and 155 by proportional representation. There is also another approach. For example, in the Republic of Poland, one chamber (Senate) is formed as a whole on the basis of majoritarian elections, the other (Sejm) - according to a proportional system.
In foreign countries, there are also non-traditional electoral systems.
The system of a single non-transferable vote (limited vote system) is voting for only one candidate in a multi-member district, as a result of which several deputies are elected (according to the number of mandates in the district) who have received the largest number of votes in succession. Rarely used (for example, in Japan until 1993).
Cumulative vote is a voting system in a multi-member district, in which a voter has several votes (equal to the number of mandates) and can vote for several candidates at once, or for one with several votes (i.e., “accumulate” his votes). This system is used in Bavaria (Germany) for elections of self-government bodies.
These two systems are recognized as variations of the majoritarian electoral system.
The electoral system refers to the types of voting provided for by Russian legislation and the methods for determining their results. The electoral system also includes legal norms regulating citizens' access to passive and active electoral rights and various issues arising during the electoral process.
In the Russian Federation, the law provides for several types of elections:
1. referendum - a form of direct expression of the will of citizens on particularly important issues,
2. elections of the President of Russia, held according to the majoritarian electoral system,
3. elections of the State Duma, highest officials subjects of the federation, representative (legislative bodies of the subjects of the federation), as a rule, providing for a mixed electoral system,
4. municipal elections, which can be of any type.
The majoritarian electoral system means that the majority of voters must vote for the winner of the election. There are three possible options for the majority system:
1. absolute majority, which is used in presidential elections, when you need to get 50% + 1 vote to win. (if 6 out of 10 people who came to the elections in 2018 vote for one of the candidates, he will win the elections in the first round or will definitely win in the second),
2. relative majority, when a candidate needs to get a simple majority of votes to win (if 3 people vote for the first candidate, and 4 for the second, and two for the current head of state, then it is the first and second candidates who will find out who will emerge victorious in the elections in the second round),
3. qualified majority, when the candidate must get not a simple 50% + 1 vote, but 2/3 or 3/4 of the votes.
On February 24, 2014, Federal Law No. 20-FZ of February 22, 2014 “On elections of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation” came into force, according to which elections of deputies of the State Duma of convocations elected after its entry into force are held according to a mixed system: 225 deputies of the State Duma are elected in single-mandate electoral districts (one district - one deputy), and the other 225 deputies are elected in the federal electoral district in proportion to the number of votes cast for the federal lists of candidates.
Regulatory legal acts regulating electoral legal relations:
1. Constitution of the Russian Federation (adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993);
2. Federal Law of June 12, 2002 No. 67-FZ “On the basic guarantees of electoral rights and the right to participate in a referendum of citizens of the Russian Federation”;