For example: in a constituency, 10 seats are contested. Of the 10,000 possible votes, Party A receives 4,160; Part B 3 380 and C 2 460. Dividing these results by 1, 2, 3. The following series are indicated: In Spain, the effective barrier of the law works much more due to the existence of many small and medium-sized districts. It is only in the largest constituencies that the legal obstacle plays a role. In Peru, 5 per cent or a total of seven nationally elected members of Congress are required in more than one electoral district. [9] What we are looking for with legal barriers is to stabilize the party system without completely excluding the entry of new actors, and to reach parliaments that are not too fragmented, which is why it is used in proportional representation systems. The advantages of divisor formulas lie in their simplicity. In particular, the D`Hondt Divisor series is very easy to use and these formulas make it possible to allocate all seats in a single operation, unlike the electoral quotient formulas. On many occasions, the D`Hondt system has been accused of favouring the major parties, but this is not true. Often, the majority effect is much more direct with other elements of the electoral system, such as electoral density, than with the electoral formula.
In the Netherlands, on the other hand, the percentage of entries into parliament is very low (0.67%), which means that they have very different representations of parties such as the Party for the Animals. This has led to the term “witness party,” which refers to small political parties whose voter turnout revolves around certain issues and causes that they want to maintain rather than govern. – Nohlen, D. 1994): Wahlsysteme und politische Parteien. Mexico. Cc. Suppose we are in a low-density district with several members, which sends 3 representatives to parliament and where there is a legally established barrier of 3%. It is the procedure of the divisor or the procedure of the greatest number and the procedure of the electoral quotient.
In Spain, the clause is set at 3% for elections to the Chamber of Deputies and 5% for municipal elections in each constituency. As far as regional elections are concerned, they vary from one region to another. Most municipalities such as Andalusia, Aragon or Catalonia have erected an electoral barrier of 3% of the vote in the constituency, while in municipalities such as Galicia and the Balearic Islands, the barrier in each constituency is 5%. In the Valencian Community, the barrier is also 5%, but not in relation to the share of votes of the constituency, but of the entire territory of the region. And in the case of the Canary Islands, a barrier of 15% of the votes on each island is eventually combined, and a barrier of 4% at the level of the autonomous community. In Sweden, the barrier clause to win a seat in the Riksdag is 4%. 2.2) Electoral quotient (or quota) procedures are characterized by the determination of an electoral quotient or a minimum number of votes to obtain a seat. Parties get as many seats as sometimes the electoral quotient corresponds to the number of votes they received. In Colombia, the electoral threshold was set in 2003 at 2 per cent of the total votes for the Senate and fifty per cent (50 per cent) of the electoral quota for the other bodies (House of Representatives, Assemblies and Councils) in order to preserve the legal personality of the political party or movement and to have access to the distribution of seats in the respective public bodies. [5] The threshold was raised to 3% by the “2009 Constitutional Reform”[6] in order to participate in the distribution of seats in the constituencies of several people from 2014. [7] In politics, the electoral barrier (also known as the electoral threshold, electoral floor, barrier clause or legal barrier) is the minimum proportion of votes that an electoral list needs to obtain seats or representatives in parliament or a similar body; or the minimum amount for a party to act in parliamentary committee.
The purpose of this clause is to avoid parliamentary fragmentation. The term legal obstacle is used when the participation of parties in the distribution of seats depends on obtaining a minimum of votes or seats. Unlike the actual (or real) obstacle, the legal obstacle is set by law. It is also important to determine whether the legal obstacle applies to the entire electoral district or only to the electoral district. For example, in Germany, at the national level, a legal barrier of 5% of valid votes or obtaining 3 seats in single-member constituencies is erected, in Spain or Argentina 3% applies to the district and in Italy or Japan 4% at the national level. Now suppose party A gets 50% of the vote and 2 seats, party B 30% of the vote and 1 seat and party C 20%. The effective barrier in this district is much higher than this legal 3% and is 30%. In Brazil, it was 5%, and if a party does not exceed this number, it will not be able to act in parliamentary committees or be considered a parliamentary group. However, this rule has been declared unconstitutional by the country`s Supreme Court.
Following an electoral reform and a constitutional amendment in 2017, the barrier clause was applied in the 2018 elections with a percentage of 1.5%. The reform foresees that the percentage will gradually increase to 2% in 2022, 2.5% in 2026 and 3% of elections from 2030. [3] [4] In Turkey, the prohibition clause is 7% to obtain representation in the National Assembly. 1) The formulas of the majority are again divided into formulas of the relative majority (or “the first to achieve the goal wins everything”) and the absolute majority. As it is usually difficult to obtain an absolute majority, it is necessary to organize a second round, in which usually only the two candidates who obtained the most votes in the first round participate. 2.1) Divisor procedures are characterized by the distribution of votes received by parties among a number of divisors, creating a sequence of decreasing quotients for each party. Seats are allocated to the highest quotients (higher numbers) In Russia, it is 7% to get a seat in the State Duma. [10] Other series of scores such as 1, 3, 5, 7, 9. or 1, 4, 3, 5, 7, 9. which determine the accuracy of the ratio of votes to seats. The two logics that lead to the two main families of formulas responsible for translating votes into majority and proportional representation seats. The best known divisor method is the D`Hondt method, proposed by the Belgian mathematics professor Victor D`Hondt at the end of the nineteenth century.
The peculiarity of this method is the series of divisors: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. The votes received by each party are divided by these divisors in successive operations. However, seats can also be allocated at the district level, for example using the residual or major-residual method. The political effect of the second round lies in the importance that small parties can win and in the support of their electorate. In Germany, you must exceed 5% or have at least three directly elected representatives to win a seat in the Bundestag and in the parliaments of the Länder. As can be seen, the formula does not reflect the right proportionality, because parties A and B won 4 seats with 41.6% and 33.8% of the vote respectively. But this is not so much because of the D`Hondt method, but because of the number of seats to be distributed in the constituency. With another seat to be distributed (11), for example, the proportion would be higher, since it belongs to the most elected party, the A. Oeil! The following text is an excerpt from the work of Dieter Nohlen, which is quoted at the end of the article. On this site, we are against hacking and anonymous citation. In Argentina, it is 3% of the register of access to the Chamber of Deputies[1] and 1.5% of valid votes in primaries that allow competition for executive or legislative positions. [2] The distribution of seats is based on the highest quotient (the highest number), so that Party A wins the 1st, 4th, 6th and 9th seats; Party B`s seats are 2nd, 5th, 8th and 10th and Party C are 3rd and 7th.
In Georgia, it is 5% for the unicameral parliament. [8] In general, this type of formula does not allow all seats in constituencies to be allocated in a single operation.