Additional Member System
The Additional Member System is an electoral system that combines elements of both proportional representation and first-past-the-post systems. Under this system, voters cast two votes - one for a specific candidate in their constituency and another for a political party. The additional members are then elected from party lists to ensure that the overall distribution of seats reflects the proportion of votes received by each party.
3 Key excerpts on "Additional Member System"
- Peter Joyce(Author)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- Teach Yourself(Publisher)
...This mixed system is used in Germany, for example, and ensures that minority parties that fare badly under the former system can be compensated under the latter. Under this country’s Additional Member System, electors have two votes in parliamentary elections. The first (Erststimme) is for a constituency candidate, who is elected under the first-past-the-post system for each of the country’s 299 single-member constituencies. The second (Zweitstimme) is for a party list drawn up in each state (or Land). The additional members are drawn from this second vote and the Hare-Niemeyer system (which replaced the D’Hondt system in 1985) is used to allocate the additional members according to the following formula: This formula provides for the proportional allocation of seats in the Bundestag : the seats won through the first-past-the-post system are subtracted from the figure obtained by this method and the shortfall is made up from candidates nominated by the states’ party lists. This system also gives electors the opportunity of ‘split-ticket’ voting: that is, they can support a constituency candidate of one party and the party list of another. This is a growing feature in German elections. In 1992 and 1993, referendums in New Zealand supported changing the electoral system from first-past-the-post to a mixed-member system, whose main features are similar to the electoral system used in Germany. This was first used in the 1996 general election, and a third referendum held in 2011 endorsed the retention of the mixed-member electoral system. Elections to the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly and Greater London Assembly also use this system...
eBook - ePubAmerican Voter Turnout
An Institutional Perspective
- David Hill(Author)
- 2018(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...4 Placing the United States in Context A Comparative Look at Electoral Systems In Chapter 3 we examined the impact of registration laws on the turnout rate in U.S. elections. In this chapter and the two following ones we will examine the impact of the U.S. electoral system on turnout. Electoral systems are rules of the game that determine how votes are cast in a country’s elections and how those votes are translated into governmental power (Blais and Massicotte 1996; Rae 1967). There are two main types of electoral systems in industrialized democracies. Plurality or majority systems seek to form a government that represents the preferences of the majority, or at least most of the citizens, within a country. Given this goal, they have been accurately classified as majoritarian systems. Proportional representation (PR) systems, on the other hand, attempt to form a government that is representative of as many groups in society as possible (Blais and Massicotte 1996; Lijphart 1984; Powell 2000). The most common form of majoritarian system is the simple plurality rules election (or first past the post), in which the candidate or party with the most votes (not necessarily a majority, or 50 percent plus one vote) wins the election. Most plurality systems are based on single-member district elections (SMD) in which a nation, state, or region is broken into geographical districts, with each district electing one representative to government. The main idea behind SMD is to elect a candidate who best represents the desires of most voters in each district. The second type of majoritarian system is based on majority rules. In these systems a candidate or party is required to win 50 percent plus one vote of the total vote in order to gain representation in the government (Dahl 2002; Blais and Massicotte 1996; Lijphart 1984; Powell 2000; Rae 1967). There are two variants of majority systems...
eBook - ePub- Nils Karlson, Nils Karlson(Authors)
- 2017(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...This question is also central in the discussion on the perceived advantages of the majority method: one man—one vote. Our analysis shows that some parties are favoured also within a proportional system. Our comparison of alternative methods shows that the plurality method boosts the representation of a few larger parties at the expense of smaller parties. In our introduction we juxtaposed the dual purposes of the electoral system to give a just representation of the voter preferences and to produce strong governments. However, the anxious debates on the electoral systems are perhaps due to our exaggerated expectations on this particular institutional arrangement; it cannot both ensure a fair representation and strong governments. And yet, a country needs a government. So how are we to resolve this apparent paradox in multiparty democracies? It is perhaps not necessary to apply the consoci- ational solution, or to favour other types of broad coalitions. One way to put the argument is to say that the challenge to the electoral system is fairness: voter preferences shall be reflected as correctly and fair as possible through the electoral system. Our analysis has shown that this is far from a trivial problem. Since concepts such as proportionality and fair representation are multifaceted, we need additional criteria and guidance in choosing between different normative principles. The main concern in this study has been to describe how electoral systems allocate parliamentary seats. The next step of deciding on one over the others—of deciding on the criteria of fairness—is a political decision...
