What Do You Know About Your Country's Electoral System?

[Næt.]

(Assuming you live in a country with elections, of course).

I'm looking for what Avenites know about their country's electoral system, namely:

1. How it works
2. The name of the system
3. Anything else you feel is relevant

No googling. I think the people of Aven can be trusted enough on this point.

Elections to national legislatures only (ie, how you vote for your representative, not your Head of State and/or Government, supranational legislatures (eg EU Parliament) or local councils or state legislatures - if you vote for such things).

Oh, and post your country as well. Almost forgot.

[5_♦♣]

I live in Canada, we have a parliamentary democracy and it works by parties (both major and small) have a candidate run in a riding (electoral) and whoever gets the most votes becomes MP (Member of Parliament). Depending on the number of candidates running, the winning candidate doesn't have to win 51% of the vote, which some people take issue with. But that's another issue for another day.

[Riven]

The UK

1. How it works

Essentially, the country (UK) is spilt into constituencies, each with its own representative in the House of Commons at Westminster in London known as Members of Parliament or MPs. Smaller political parties will tend to run candidates in constituencies where they think they can win, while the bigger parties (Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dems) will generally run candidates in every constituency. Sometimes there will be local agreements between parties to not run against one another in certain constituencies, but this is usually rare. On voting day (always a Thursday), people vote, but due to how the system works, a candidate only needs x number of votes to be elected. Once they reach this magic number, they are the representative for that constituency. Because large swaths of the country tend to vote the same way each election, only constituencies that could change political hands really get to decide their MP. If you live in what's known as a 'safe seat' but don't vote for the party your MP is from, your vote is essentially wasted.

2. The name of the system

First Past the Post or FPTP

3. Anything else...

FPTP favours the larger political parties while ensuring governments of one political strip; while the Alternative Vote and Proportional Representation systems would help the smaller parties more, while meaning governments of coalitions or minority governments are more likely. This is complicated by the fact that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their own governments who run certain affairs in their own territories (such as Health, Tax, Transport), but the populations of those countries also vote for constituency MPs for Westminster. This is even further complicated by the fact that England itself doesn't have it's own parliament, just Westminster, so there are accusations that the whole system is unfair. Personally, I think a more federal UK would be better, but at this rate Scotland is likely to become independent before that happens.

[Basileus]

Germany

1. How it works.

During elections you get two votes.

With the first you vote for you direct representative. These are usually members of a party, but in theory you can be an independent candidate.

With the second one you vote for a party directly. Seats in parliament are then directly allocated to members of this party according to how much percentage of the vote they got. Additionally a party has to win at least five percent of the vote in order to get into parliament, or win three direct seats.

After that it is checked if any party has won more seats through direct candidates, than they would have through the second votes and if that's the case more representatives are given to the other parties in order to ensure that all parties represented in parliament have the exact number of seats they would have gotten according to the second vote.

2. The name of the system.

I didn't know what it would be called in English so I used Google and I think it should be proportional representation.

3. Anything else.

Well, essentially, its the opposite of what the person from the UK said. This system favors the existence of smaller parties, while making it so that almost always no single parties gets the absolute majority. So in Germany, almost all governments are coalitions of two or three parties (there are a few exceptions on a state level and during the beginning of the federal republic I think one parties had one term with an absolute majorities on the federal level).

What is probably the biggest problem with this, is that members of parliament almost never vote against the party line, since a lot of them are dependent on being put into parliament by their parties leadership. The five percent thing is also sometimes problematic, since voting for a party that does not get five percent of the vote, is like throwing your vote away (as an example, during the last federal elections, almost 15 percent of people voted for parties that didn't make it into parliament.)

[iff]

IRELAND

How it works
We have multi seat constituencies, approximately 40 of seats between 3 seats, 4 seats and 5 seats, when voting we mark preferences down as far as we can go. last time out, I went to no 15 to mark my dissatisfaction with one particular candidate . there is a quota in place which is valid votes/(number of seats+ 1 vote) + 1 so if 10,000 votes were cast in my constituency which is a 5 seater so that is 10,000/ (5+1) = 1,667 + 1 vote = 1,668 so if 5 people got 1,668 votes, it would be impossible for another person to be elected. essentially in a 3 seat constituency, you need 25% to be elected, a four seater 20% and a five seater 16.67%. candidates are deemed elected if they surpass the quota and then their votes are apportioned between the remaining candidates in a system a lot of people don't understand. if in my example, it was 2,000 votes then 332 votes were be distributed to other candidates, in the proportion of the next preferences they received. if the distribution is greater than the distributable vote, then a portion is not transferred, if the distributions is greater than the distributable vote, then it is proportionate so if 500 of the 2,000 had second preferences, then the vote would be 332/500 and each distrubted vote would be worth 0.664 votes. if it was 1,000 had second preferences, it would be worth 0.332 votes if 100 only had second preferences, it would be worth 1 vote each. did i mention that not many people understand this. a candidate gets eliminate if they are bottom of the poll without enough transfers from an elected candidate would take them above the other. multiple candidates may be eliminated in one round if the total of the votes below them would not get them above other candidates so you would see more candidates eliminate early in this.

The name of the system
proportional representation - single transferable vote - i think malta also uses the same system but due to less parties in theirs, it is not as convoluted as ours

Anything else you feel is relevant
It helps smaller parties to be elected to seats and independents, 6 parties got candidates elected last time along with 14 independents out of the 166 seats while my favourite party, Greens lost all 6 seats because they went into government in 2007 as part of a coalition.
A thing I don't like of it is that 1) it encourages a focus on local issues as members of the same party have to compete against each other. there is a story where a td (teachta dala - member of the house) had been called to a constituents house, she had been in a panic and all she wanted was someone to get a box from the attic, which is ridiculous but if he didn't do it, one of the others in the constituency would. so last time out in my constituency you had labour, fine gael and fianna fail won multiple candidates and you have sinn fein running them next time out in 2016, probably the same as other parties. Another thing I dislike is that candidates can get voted in with disapproval of their consitutents of 83% in theory if they find 16.67% to be elected (so the person who topped the poll was the candidate i was showing my dissatisfaction with.]i don't think i explained it well so any questions, please ask.

[Sage Raven Domino]

Russia

Oh dear, you're making me feel ashamed because I've stopped keeping track of the Russian Constitution since around 2006, when huge back and forth reformations started happening. I apologise if some info from my memory is incorrect, I'll check it with Wiki afterwards.

The 2011 election to the State Duma (the lower house of the Federal Assembly - the parliament - that however has a bit of freedom, e.g. it elects the PM proposed by the President with no need for the approval of the upper house - the Federation Council) was entirely proportional (the 450 seats were split proportionally between the parties that passed the 7% barrier). Up to 2003, the Duma election was the German way, i.e. half the seats (225) were filled proportionally with a 5% barrier, half (225) - in the majoritary (FPTP) fashion. In 2011, the term of the Duma was increased from 4 to 5 years, i.e. the next election is in 2016 (and tbh, I didn't even remember if it's still gonna be totally proportional like in 2011; but see the errata).

Until ~2006, the upper chamber consisted simply of the governors (heads of regional governments), who were elected directly by the citizens of the respective region. Then governors started being elected indirectly (by regional chambers, proposed by the President) and ceased to be MPs; instead, there are now separate Federation Council reps, who're also selected indirectly by regional parliaments and the President.

As a result of the 'White Revolution' of 2011-12, governors are now elected directly by citizens again, but there are still separate members of the Federation Council - this way, governors don't need to get distracted by legislative sessions (approval of federal laws composed and passed by the Duma). Also, registering a party is now easier than in 2006-11, so hopefully there will be more diversity in the 2016-21 Duma than in the 2007-16 ones, where only 4 parties are represented and all of them are 'tame'.

Errata (upon looking Wiki up)

1. The 2007 Duma election was already entirely proportional with a 7% barrier. (I didn't remember it because my vote didn't really matter anyway - United Russia took the absolute majority, which allowed it to alter the Constitution rather freely).

2. The 2016 Duma election will be again half proportional with a 5% barrier, half FPTP. This has been established by the brand new electoral law on 24.02.2014.

3. The current way of formation of the Federal Council is in force since 2002; each region is repped by two members, one of whom is appointed by the governor and one of whom is elected by the regional parliament.

4. Governors weren't elected directly in 2005-2012.

[ThaHoward]

1: How it works, too complicated. The less densley counties get more votes and so on, i.e someone in a county can have their votes count as 3 times as in Oslo. Then it is mandates to even out things so that it will be a "fairer" system which again make the miniority lock down the parliament. Then it is a 2% vote limit to get a represantitive in the parliament. Then the parliament is divided into represeantives for each county, which again is elected in each county. Then these representatives come to the parliament based upon the number of votes in the county.. Then if you got a majority you can rule alone, however most times you need a coalition or a miniority government supporrted by some minor parties. Then you need 51% to get a new law, and 75% to change the constitution..

2: Parliamentarism.

3: Too much power to small parties and some counties being worth more than others :P

[Corretto]

In NZ [proudly the first country on the planet to 'give women the right-to-vote']...

Thankfully, back in 1996, we biffed-out the archaic First Past The Post system [FPP] and replaced it with the Mixed Member Proportional system [MMP]. The latter was modeled on changes made to the German system.

The elections are held every three years in a country divided, geographically, into 71 electorates. Uniquely, and often disputed, seven of those are Maori Electorates. These are voted in by those who can confirm their Maori [native pop'n] descendency.

Each electorate selects one representative for the single-level parliament. There are no upper and lower levels of parliament. An electorate's Member of Parliament [MP] is a candidate selected by a simple majority of votes in the electorate they wish to represent.

A tricky aspect of the system, that is misunderstood by many voters, is the election of list MPs. These are additional MPs that reflect the proportion of each political party that sits in Parliament via that party's election in the true constituencies [electorates]. As these list MPs are selected by the party, and not by the electorate voter, they need not have any localised association with an electorate. The existence of list MPs is a contentious issue.

The number of MPs we have is another issue. Many people believe we have too many representing a total population of only 4.5 million .

Local Governments are elected by a totally separate system, even though their members often share political party associations within Central Government.

[iff]

The number of MPs we have is another issue. Many people believe we have too many representing a total population of only 4.5 million .

we have roughly the same population but our elected representatives is 166 though due to fall to 157. And then there is an upper house of 60 so we have 87 more than you. I was talking to a new zealander i know and he was shocked at our number.

[scarletlatitude]

America, and it freakin sucks. Super sized awful with a side of HOLY CRAP these are the most degenerate dipwads that could possibly be in charge of anything.

That's all that I have to say about that. :P

[No seriously I know how the government runs. I'm just very cynical about it.]

[LaMaestra]

Super sized awful with a side of holy crap.

Love it!

[Sally]

1. How it works

Painfully, creakily, and unfairly

2.The name of the system

Representative democracy

3.Anything else you feel is relevant

The main entity being represented now is the conglomeration of corporations owned by Republicans.

[Sage Raven Domino]

^ Such clumsy traditional electoral procedures in what's thought to be the world's best democracy... doublefacepalm.jpg

[elainetta]

Seriously, why do Americans spend all that press on the Presidential election but basically divert our attention away from when we elect the humans who will actually be making the laws and setting policy? Do we not actually realize that the President can't do much more than ask nicely (or not so nicely) if Congress will pretty please help them enact such and such a law? Yes, the President has a lot of power in our country, more than he* has had in decades past.

*do I really need to explain my unfortunate decision to use this pronoun? -_-

But, I'll think back to the special elections Massachusetts (my state of residence at the time, hereafter referred to as MA, its postal abbreviation) held when Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy passed away those years ago. I was in a U.S. Government class at the time, so.... why the hell did I forget everything I learned in there? >.< ... Maybe because it was 6 years ago.

(Yes, this Was for the national legislature. Ted was one of the two Senators designated to come from MA. See below.)

I unfortunately do not know the name of the system. I do know that when the incumbent decides to run again, replacing them is usually difficult because the voters don't bother running anyone else. The election to replace Sen. Kennedy was called a special election because it was held at an odd time of year, in an off-year besides, due to the Senator's death. Each of the main two parties ran someone: Scott Brown, a Republican who actually managed** to win the special election, and Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat who took his seat during the very next regular election and remains incumbent. I strongly believe I only remember this election so much because there was an actual contest regarding who could win, so we actually saw ads on television and online bashing the different candidates, much like a Presidential election. Normally, the election year passes with perhaps a statement that, "Oh yeah, they are holding elections this November, aren't they? Forgot."

**MA is typically Democrat territory. I believe I lived in the only part of the state where our local reps were Republicans. *cough*

If anyone cares, I do not affiliate with either major party, nor with any minor ones, or with the Independents.... It's a lot like my sexual orientation, but without the ally part.

Elections are always held on a Tuesday, including the one highlighted above. Normal elections take place each November. We elect Legislators every two years, both halfway through the President's term and at the end of it. (Off-years are for local officials, like mayors and school boards.)

The United States have (has? ) two branches to our main government, the only difference to their election processes being the House of Representatives has members based on the population of each state - California and Texas have more reps in there than Montana, Wyoming, and Rhode Island, for example - and the Senate always has 2 from each state, regardless of population. Because of the varying number of representatives, the Representatives are elected from smaller districts than the Senators - unless your state has a very small population, which would mean the whole state votes on just one Rep. (I'm 90% sure there is at least one Republican currently representing MA in the House, because there'd be more Reps than Sens). You vote for the district where you live.

Oh yeah, and the House of Representatives will always have 500 some-odd members - it's a fixed number, I just forget it - distributed among the states by population. If the population of one state rises enough to grant them another seat, one of the larger states loses a seat, and if all works right that state would be the one with the greatest recent population loss.

Beyond that... I was too young to vote in the aforementioned election (was 17 at the time, or else the Gov teacher might have made voting a class assignment) and deemed myself too uninformed to vote in any subsequent one for anything as obscure as the National Legislature. I believe that those elections shouldn't be obscure, but broadcasting and advertising for those elections might cause some of the sitting politicians to lose their seat. Can't have that, of course.

I've only posted this because it's more detailed than anyone has said yet about the Semi-United States of 'Murica. But the answers so far given were also spot-on.

Editing for clarity in places

And again to add stuff I forgot.

[Member4445]

I'm from England and our PM is currently David Camoran with that treacherous lying asshole, Nick Clegg (student fee related anger). Their minions all meet up in Parliament where they discuss the latest ways to screw over the peasants and raise their own income. They participate in bondage involving Parliamentary Whips where they get photographed and become embroiled in national scandals.

We have elections but really, the one who makes the best sex tape is rigged to become PM.

He thinks he holds the reigns, but really it's the illuminati.

[5_♦♣]

Oh yeah, and the House of Representatives will always have 500 some-odd members - it's a fixed number, I just forget it.

435.