Political Paradoxes, May 15, 2008

1. Political Paradoxes, May 15, 2008

2. Today: • Evaluations • Elections in Africa note • Brief summary for last time • Freakonomics chapter • Democracy: Romania vs. Russia • Discussion: polisci discipline

4. PR formulas • Two types of proportional electoral formulas: • Largest remainders (e.g., Hamilton) – non-monotonic • Highest averages (e.g., Jefferson; also known as d’Hondt in Europe) - monotonic

5. PR in Romania • In Romania, until 2004, PR for the Senate & Chamber of Deputies was a two-step process (see electoral law, Article 91, paragraphs 2-4/pp. 55-56, available at http://www.cdep.ro/proiecte/2004/400/20/0/leg_pl420_04.pdf )

6. “Giurgiu Paradox” • The 1996 results for the Senate (Giurgiu): PDSR 46,810 CDR 39,672 (35.37%) USD (PD + PSD) 16,680 PRM 6,833 PUNR 1,894 UDMR 269 (0.23%) (see http://www.kappa.ro/guv/bec/j-sen.html)

7. Who got the two Senate seats? • Giurgiu has two Senate seats • One Senate seat went to PDSR (the party received the largest number of votes in Giurgiu) • The second Senate seat went to UDMR (269 votes, or about 147 times less than the Democratic Convention); see • http://www.kappa.ro/guv/bec/p-sen.html

8. Alabama Paradox: • What is AP? When it did occur? Why? • What is monotonicity? • Two types of formulas (monotonic vs. non-monotonic) • Alabama Paradox, population paradox, new states paradox • Fix(es) to AP? How to prevent it?

9. Electoral Engineering in Chile • What were the bad news for the incumbents? • What were the good news? • What is the best electoral system in those circumstances? Why? • Did gerrymandering play a role in Chile? • Did the system work as intended? • Is it fair to call Chile a “limited democracy”?

10. Gerrymandering • What is gerrymandering? Where does the name come from? • What types of electoral systems are most conducive to gerrymandering? • Purpose? (three kinds) • Techniques? (types)

11. Simple example • A state (region, district, county, judet…) is entitled to three seats • Two parties (Dems & Reps) • We have nine neighborhoods, four with Democratic majorities, five with Republican majorities:

12. Geographic distribution:

13. Column constituencies: 1D, 2R

14. Row constituencies: 2D, 1R

15. Limited Vote in Britain • Why was the Limited Vote introduced? • What were the two main goals of electoral reform? • Describe how Limited Vote works • What were the actual results? • Were the initial goals too optimistic? Why (or why not)?

16. Did Limited Vote achieve its goals? (i) Lessening the power of parties? • Not really; on the contrary, it led to the development of the Birmingham caucus (ii) Protecting minorities? • Did not happen in Birmingham; in Leeds, it led to a “tyranny of minority” instead • Aren’t the two goals mutually exclusive?

17. Where Have All the Criminals Gone? • Crime went up in the US for decades • Then it started to decline • Why?  Not the strong economy  Not the increased use of capital punishment: → “life on death row safer than on the streets” → not much effect, even if there is one (!?)  Notinnovative policing

18.  Nottougher gun laws • Not the aging of the population Did have some effect: • Increased reliance on prisons • Increased number of police • Changes in crack and other drug markets However, this is not the whole story Also Roe vs. Wade: changes in abortion policies/legislation How does Levitt go about proving this claim?

19. “X” → Democracy • (Economic) development • Predominant religion • Natural resources • Political culture • Mode of transition • Institutional design

20. Note: “democracy” • Respondents asked to rate the importance of democracy for them, on a scale from 1 (very important) to 10 (not important at all). • Thus, the lower the score, the more important democracy is for the respondent

22. Note: “Communism” • Respondents were asked their opinions about Communism (evaluate the regime). Available choices: (1)  Communism is a bad idea (2)  Communism was a good idea, but it was badly implemented (in Ro.) (3)  Communism is good, and it was implemented well (in Ro.)

23. Wealth & Communism:

24. Education → Democracy

25. Education & Communism

26. Soros Barometer, November 2007 • Questions: • Death penalty support (% support - % oppose) • Better to have two parties or more (% agree - % wanting one party or no parties) • Communism: % who thinks Communism was a bad political system

27. Policy positions of presidential electorates

28. Policy positions of party electorates

29. PNG vs. Becali electorates

30. “Development” & democracy in Ro • Positive relation between wealth and education, on the one hand, and support for democracy, on the other • Wealth → democracy • Education → democracy

31. Modernization theory Economic development Social development Values (pro-democratic) Democracy

32. Religion & democracy • Protestantism → democracy • Islam → authoritarianism • Orthodoxy? Natural resources: • The “resource curse”

33. Ethnic diversity: Inimical to democracy (?) • Mode of transition: Violent vs. negotiated • Romania vs. Russia?

34. Romania vs. Russia • Development • Ethnic divisions • Religion • Communist legacy • Political culture • Mode of transition