Electoral process and systems

Lesson Objective: Describe the electoral processes and systems used to elect a government in the Commonwealth Caribbean.

Define the following terms and concepts: government, political party, constituency, candidate, electorate, voters’ list, floating voter, representative, adult suffrage, franchise, manifesto, ballot, hung parliament, government of national unity, coalition government.

Remember the following concepts apply when a citizen is asked to vote.

Choice – between the two electoral systems.
Identity – characteristics of each electoral system.
Conflict – failure of first-past-the-post to adequately reflect the
wishes of the electorate.

Cooperation/interaction – between parties in a coalition
government; a government of national unity; political parties
and the electoral body.
Development/change – the demands for electoral reform.
Integration – monitoring of elections by CARICOM observers.

Electoral process  https://www.ebctt.com/electoral-process/

The electoral process is to be explained in further detail via zoom class.

Electoral Systems

An electoral or voting system is how votes are translated into seats. It determines how many votes and what kinds of votes are necessary to award seats to candidates and parties in an election. Different electoral systems produce different kinds of results, and give voters different kinds of choices.

The electoral system determines the “exchange rate” between votes and seats – that is, how votes are translated into seats.  How many and what kind of votes are needed to get a seat varies from system to system.  As a result, different electoral systems give politicians incentives to organize and campaign in different ways.  Some electoral systems may even create barriers for certain types of candidates.  Different electoral systems give voters different kinds of choices, which can then affect the decisions voters make.

Features and Characteristics of Electoral Systems

A democratic electoral system can be said to be one where:

• elections are regular and fair
• votes are of equal value
• the will of the majority is achieved
• the interests of minorities are taken into consideration
• there is a high level of participation by the electorate
• there is the maximum possible franchise
• voting is accessible

Electoral systems: First – past – the – post and Proportional Representation (PR).

First – past – the – post or simple majority voting is an electoral system in which the candidate receiving more votes than any other candidate is declared elected, whether or not the winner has received an absolute majority of the votes. The first-past-the-post system is used to elect Members to the House of Representatives.

On election day, voters receive a ballot paper with a list of candidates. As only one MP will represent the area, each party only stands one candidate to choose from. Voters usually put a cross next to their favourite candidate. But if they think their favourite has a low chance of winning, they may put a cross next to one they like with a better chance of winning. During a General Election, constituencies across the country each hold separate contests. To become an MP, a candidate needs the largest number of votes in their area. This means every MP has a different level of local support. In many areas, the majority of people will not have voted for their MP. Even if millions of voters support the same party, if they are thinly spread out they may only get the largest number of votes in a couple of these contests. Tens of thousands of voters supporting the same party and living in the same area will end up with more MPs. This means the number of MPs a party has in parliament rarely matches their popularity with the public.

The advantages and benefits of a FPTP voting system

• It’s simple to understand.
• It doesn’t cost much to administer.
• It’s is fairly quick to count the votes and work out who has won; meaning results can be declared relatively quickly after the polls close.
• In a political environment, FPTP enables voters to clearly express a view on which party they think should form the next government.
• FPTP is ideally suited to a two-party system and generally produces single-party governments
• Single-party governments by and large don’t have to rely on support from other parties to pass legislation.
• Some would argue that FPTP voting systems encourage broad-church centrist policies and discourage extremist points of view

The disadvantages and shortcomings of FPTP voting systems

• Representatives can get elected with small amounts of public support, as the size of the winning margin is irrelevant: what matters is only that they get more votes than other candidates.
• FPTP encourages tactical voting, as voters often vote not for the candidate they most prefer, but against the candidate they most dislike.
• FPTP is regarded as wasteful, as votes cast in a constituency for losing candidates, or for the winning candidate above the level they need to win that seat, count for nothing.
• FPTP can severely restrict voter choice. Parties are not homogenous and do not speak with one unified voice. Parties are more coalitions of many different viewpoints. If the preferred-party candidate in a constituency has views with which a voter doesn’t agree, he or she doesn’t have a means of expressing that at the ballot box.
• Rather than allocating seats in line with actual support, FPTP rewards parties with what is often termed ‘lumpy’ support; that is, with just enough votes to win in each particular area. With smaller parties, this works in favour of those with centralised support.
• With relatively small constituency sizes, the way boundaries are drawn can have important effects on the election result.
• Having small constituencies often leads to a proliferation of safe seats, where the same party is all but guaranteed re-election at each election. This not only effectively disenfranchises a region’s voters, but it leads to these areas being ignored when it comes to framing policy.
• If large areas of the country are effectively electoral deserts for any particular party, not only is the area ignored by that party, but also ambitious politicians from the area will have to move away from their locality if they aspire to have influence within their party.
• Because FPTP restricts a constituency’s choice of candidates, the representation of minorities and women suffers, as the ‘safest’ looking candidate is the one most likely to be offered the chance to stand for election
• Although encouraging two-party politics can be advantageous, in a multi-party culture, third parties with significant support can often be greatly disadvantaged.

Proportional Representation (PR).

Proportional representation (PR) is a term used to describe a range of electoral systems in which the distribution of seats corresponds closely with the proportion of the total votes cast for each party or individual candidate. PR offers alternatives to first past the post and other majoritarian voting systems based on single-member electoral areas, which tend to produce disproportionate outcomes and to have a bias in favour of larger political groups. PR systems by contrast tend to offer a better chance of representation to smaller parties and groups.

The advantages of a PR electoral system

• Moving to proportional representation (PR) may offer would give minority parties and independent candidates a better chance of winning seats in Parliament.
• The current First Past the Post electoral system is considered unrepresentative, as candidates can be elected with a very small share of the votes while all other votes cast in the constituency are wasted.
• PR ensures that the parties would have to appeal to their core supporters, rather than a small number of so called ‘swing voters’ in marginal seats.
• It could be argued that PR delivers fairer treatment of minority parties and independent candidates
• Under PR fewer votes are ‘wasted’ as more people’s preferences are taken into account
• PR potentially offers greater and more-representative choice for voters.
• PR may encourage turn-out and reduce apathy.
• PR rarely produces an absolute majority for one party, however, it could be argued that PR ensures greater continuity of government and requires greater consensus in policy-making.

The disadvantages of a PR electoral system

• Under FPTP, MPs serve the constituency they campaign in. This makes them more inclined to tackle important local issues.
• PR can potentially provide a route for extremists to force their way into the political mainstream: under a FPTP electoral system this would be unlikely to happen.
• Some would say that PR produces ‘weak’ coalition governments rather than ‘strong’ majority governments, which arguably can lead to indecision, compromise and even legislative paralysis.
• PR can also reduce accountability to voters, as an ousted party of government can retain office by finding new coalition partners after an election.
• The adoption of PR list systems weakens the link between the elected representative and his or her constituency.
• The greater complexity and choice that PR allows can put voters off voting, by requiring them to have a greater knowledge of individual and party positions.

Activity

state why PR is a better way of determining votes as opposed to FPTP in CARICOM countries