1 / 26

Party Development

Party Development. Overview: Electoral Systems -> Party Systems Electoral Systems -> Candidate Behaviour Carey & Shugart: If electoral system encourages the building of personal reputation there a “tension” exists between party candidates and party leaders

zack
Download Presentation

Party Development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Party Development • Overview: • Electoral Systems -> Party Systems • Electoral Systems -> Candidate Behaviour • Carey & Shugart: If electoral system encourages the building of personal reputation there a “tension” exists between party candidates and party leaders • How can parties constrain their members ? • Under what circumstances can candidates be constrained ?

  2. Why Hungary ? • Hungary is an interesting case to look at this issues: • First ‘democratic’ election for 40 years held in 1990. • Many (who?) legislators feel the pressure to develop a personal reputation during in the first parliament. • We get to see parties, and voters, respond to their behaviour.

  3. The Hungarian Electoral System • Mixed Electoral System • 176 seats: Single-member Districts • (Run-off) • 152 seats: Multimember Districts (PR) • 58 seats: National District • PR – compensatory • Incentives ? • Consequences for legislative organization

  4. The Legislature (Országgyüles) • The Legislatures inherits the rules of the communist legislature • Members have great freedom to: • Speak • Offer legislative initiatives and amendments • Questions • Change party membership • New rules adopted in 1994

  5. Constitutional Changes • Bargained transformation from Communism • Two-thirds majority required to change legislative rules • New (more restrictive) rules are passed in 1994 • Why ? Less freedom for legislators!

  6. Legislative Behaviour • Legislative initiatives, motions to speak, amendments … • Electoral base does not appear to influence legislative behavior • However, difference in types of issues • Territorial issues raised by legislators elected in SMD (or strong local ties) • Perceptions of elites

  7. Party composition • Each party has both members elected in SMD and MMD. • The parties differ in the ratios of members elected in SMD and MMD • Consequences? • Parties might favour different legislative structures

  8. The Roots of the Party System • The MDF and SZDSZ ‘umbrella’ organization. • Lack of coherent party platforms • Musical chairs • Very little party cohesion and discipline

  9. Cohesion • MDF and Independents – low cohesion, many SMD members • MSZP and Fidez – higher cohesion, few SMD members • Montgomery stats?

  10. Electoral Success in 1994 • MSZP won one SMD in 1990, won 149 SMD in 1994 & a total of 209 seats -> Majority party • Question: Would we expect MSZP preferences for legislative reform to change ? • Yet the party adopts more restrictive legislative rules!

  11. Learning from Elections • In 1994 elections the disciplined parties gained, and the others lost • Party members infer that strong parties in legislature are key to win re-election • Did MPs deliver ? Only 40% of voters recognizing their MP said they would vote for them -> Either MPs didn’t deliver, or voters did not notice/care

  12. Influence on Electoral Reform • Most SMD legislators got kicked out • MSZP leaders moved fast while the lesson is fresh in mind. • Most MSZP members from previous legislature returned – the core party still existed. -> Electoral Reform passes without much of a fight.

  13. Országgyüles 1998 (57.0 %) (Percentages of first round) % 386 Magyar Szocialista Párt (Hungarian Socialist Party) MSzP 32.3 134 Fiatal Demokraták Szövetsége (Alliance of Young Democrats) FIDESz 28.2 148 Független Kisgazda, Földmunkas és Polgári Párt (Independent Party of Smallholders) FKgP 13.8 48 Szabad Demokraták Szövetsége (Alliance of Free Democrats, liberal) SzDSz 7.9 24 Magyar Igazság és Elet Pártja (Hungarian Justice and Life Party, nationalist) MIEP 5.5 14 Munkáspárt (Workers' Party, communist) MP 4.1 - Magyar Demokrata Fórum (Hungarian Democratic Forum, conservative/christian-democratic) MDF 3.1 17 Kereszténydemokrata Néppárt (Christian-Democratic People's Party) KDNP 2.6 -

  14. Where do Political Institutions come from ? • Hungary: Party leaders adopt new institutions that strengthen their leadership • Legislative institutions are not the only institutions that can be changed • Electoral systems are also susceptible to change

  15. Political Institution • Not a matter of social engineering but a political choice • It is political because, as we have seen, institutions condition outcomes • What is necessary for them to be a political choice: • Parties have preference over policy • Parties know electorate • Parties understand the electoral rules

  16. The Proposition • Parties will seek to adopt an electoral system that favours them • Maximize their number of seats but …? • In parliamentary systems the relationship between number of seats and a seat in the cabinet is not straightforward

  17. Post-war Germany • Eleven Lander • Parties • SDP (left) • CDU (right) [CSU-Bavaria] • FDP (center) • KPD – communist • Other small parties

  18. Electoral System 1946 • Military Governors decided on electoral systems for the Landtage • Election to the Landtage informed parties about their support at the national level • The national electoral system was drafted by the Parliamentary Council (Proportional) and approved by the Conference of Minister-Presidenten

  19. Deciding on an Electoral System • The Basic Law: Only requires free, direct, equal and secret elections • Provisional system • Drafted by Committee on Voting Rights (4 CDU, 4 SDP, 1 KPD, 1 (chair) FDP) • Possible majority coalitions the same in Committee, Council, & Conference • Coalition: SPD, FDP, Z, KPD • Adopt PR in favour of SMD. Why?

  20. The Electoral System of 1949 • Bundestag: 400 seats • Single ballot • 60% elected in SMD by plurality • 40% elected by PR in each Land • Land seats are compensatory, i.e., the goal is PR. • SMD primarily influence who fills the party seat

  21. PR or SMD? • The alternative was FPTP (SMD) • How would it have influence the election outcome? • An easy way to approach the question is to compare the number of seats won using the mixed-member system and the alternative, SMD. • Table 4 • Both CDU and SDP win less seats, FDP gains

  22. PR and SMD? • SDP wins more seats under alternative • The possibility of forming a coalition, however, is not good • CDU, on the other hand, wins close a close to the majority and would have many potential coalitions

  23. Changes in 1953 • An electoral threshold – 5% or three district seats • Two votes: One district (SMD) vote and one party vote • A FPD voter can cast a vote for an SDP candidate w/out hurting FDP (much) • The same parties supported the change

  24. Ticket Splitting • Parties expecting to win more party votes among ticket splitters favour the two ballot system • Why do voters split tickets? • Personal vote • Government Connection • Wasted Votes • CDU most likely to win district votes on split tickets on each count

  25. Do voters split their ticket ? • How do we measure? • Difference between district and party vote • Incumbency: D>P • Wasted votes: Major parties D>P • Government Connections: D>P • Support? Appears especially true for CDU -> Change disadvantages CDU

  26. Summary • Does the German case match our expectations? • Two major parties equal in strength -> SMD/FPTP? • The SDP wants to maximize it chances of forming a coalition government.

More Related