comp4

Question 1

The use of elections is a defining factor of

Answer 1

democracies

Question 2

A set of laws and regulations that govern the electoral competition between parties and candidates is known as an

Answer 2

electoral system

Question 3

Most political scientists categorize electoral systems into two based on the electoral formula used to translate votes into seats.
These are,

Answer 3

majoritarian and proportional

Question 4

Elections are both a – , and –

Answer 4

practical ( provide the primary means by which citizens select their representatives), symbolic (a democratic government is legitimized by the fact that it came to power through an electoral process)

Question 5

Democratic elections provide the primary mechanism by
which -

Answer 5

the citizens consent translates into authority to rule

Question 6

Elections do not only happen in democracies, but they have also increasingly become common in -

Answer 6

dictatorships. they serve to gain favor with foreign aid donors, as a safely valve for public discontent, co-op the elite and larger societal groups or to gather information about the
strength of the opposition

Question 7

Dictatorial elections are seldom used as a mechanism for

Answer 7

translating the people’s consent into authority to govern

Question 8

electoral integrity

Answer 8

the extent to which the conduct of election meets
international standards and global norms concerning “good” elections according to various treaties, conventions, and guidelines issued by organizations such as the UN General Assembly, the African Union, the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe, and the Organization of American
States

Question 9

electoral malpractice

Answer 9

Violations of electoral integrity such as ballot stuffing, electoral violence and voter intimidation, pro-government media bias, and restrictive ballot access

Question 10

Electoral malpractice is not limited to underdeveloped,
authoritarian regimes, or new democracies, there is evidence of
malpractice in

Answer 10

democracies such as the United States. This includes political interference in the drawing of district boundaries, voter registration issues, unfair campaign finance rules, and technical failures with online or early voting procedures

Question 11

According to Norris (2014), flawed elections can

Answer 11

• Reduce trust in the political system
• Fuel social instability
• Undermine recent democratic gains
• Discourage voter participation and other forms of civic activism and
• Exacerbate ethnic, religious, and other grievances can lead to civil war in extreme situations

Question 12

Determinants of Electoral Integrity

Answer 12

1. Domestic cultural constraints
2. The international community
3. Institutional design
4. Electoral Management Bodies

Question 13

Domestic cultural constraints

Answer 13

level of economic development, a country’s dependence on natural resources, a legacy of conflict, and inhospitable geography. Wealthy countries have resources to devote to the electoral process while poor countries will experience challenges due to the cost of holding elections. Natural resource rich countries will show high levels of corruption. Logistical financial and
technical challenges in running elections in states with mountains, and other difficult places to reach

Question 14

The international community

Answer 14

There is a claim that
countries more integrated into the global system are more likely to adopt international norm and practices that encourage
electoral integrity. European countries are incentivized to respect human rights and have free and fair elections for membership in the European Union Dictatorships are less likely to feel pressure to produce high
levels of electoral integrity
While there are claims that donor countries can use foreign aid to encourage electoral integrity, there are many reasons to doubt
the willingness and ability of donor countries to bring meaningful electoral reforms to donor recipient countries

Question 15

Institutional design

Answer 15

according to some scholars, countries with power-sharing institutions show high levels of electoral integrity than those with power that is concentrated in the hands
of the majority ( Lijphart, 2004; Norris, 2015). There are checks and balances

Question 16

Electoral Management Bodies

Answer 16

Ones that administer
elections. Because this institutions and bodies are independent of the executive branch and have the functional capacity, they can hold high –quality elections

Question 17

Most scholars classify electoral systems based on the electoral formula used to translate votes into seats. The two main electoral
system categories are

Answer 17

1. Majoritarian
2. Proportional

Question 18

Majoritarian Electoral Systems

Answer 18

An electoral system in which the parties or candidates with the most votes win
-The word majoritarian does not necessarily mean the winning candidate or party attained an absolute majority of the votes, it might require only that the winning party or candidate win more
votes than anyone else
* Majoritarian possibly refers to the largest party winning a
majority of the legislative seats even if it does not win the majority of the votes
-The majoritarian system tend to help the largest party
achieve a legislative majority

Question 19

Single Member District Plurality System (SMDP)

Answer 19

• The simplest and most frequently used majoritarian system in the world. Used in the UK and its former colonies
• SMDP systems are sometimes referred to as “first –past –the – post ( FPTP)

Question 20

strengths of SMDP system

Answer 20

simplicity, and only one representative is elected per
district producing high level of constituency levels and close bonds between constituents and representatives

Question 21

weaknesses of SMDP system

Answer 21

There is the possibility of producing unrepresentative outcomes both at the district (Table 11.1 example) and at the national level
* Other criticism of the system is that it encourages individuals to vote not for their true preferences, but strategically. Meaning voting for the candidate who has a realistic chance of winning

Question 22

While there are no “strategy proof” systems, SMDP, creates

Answer 22

stronger incentives for individuals to act strategically than other
systems

Question 23

the single nontransferable vote ( SNTV).

Answer 23

The second type of majoritarian system. It is like an SMDP electoral system except that it works in multimember districts. Every party competing in a district puts up a list of candidates and voters pick one of them. In a three-seat district, the top three candidates with
most votes are elected

Question 24

strength of SNTV

Answer 24

this system produces more proportional outcomes and great representation for smaller parties and minority ethnic groups because they can get elected even if they do not have the most votes

Question 25

weaknesses of SNTV

Answer 25

* They tend to weaken political parties because they create incentives for intraparty fighting and fractionalization.Candidates compete against both candidates from other parities, but from their party too ( Afghan) * Candidates can guarantee their own elections using a specific percentage of votes, this encourages clientelism and the creation of patronage systems- candidates bribe well-defined groups at the expense of broader public interest ( example of Japan)

Question 26

SNTV tends to favor

Answer 26

incumbents and well-organized parties

Question 27

Because the candidates under SNTV can win with only a small fraction of the vote share means they -

Answer 27

do not have to moderate their political message can espouse a more extremist rhetoric to appeal to a specific segment of the electorate

Question 28

Alternative Vote

Answer 28

A majoritarian system in which the winning candidate must have a majority of votes. It is a preference voting system used in single-member districts where voters rank order the candidates. Voters place numbers next to the names of candidates on the ballot to show if each is the voter’s first choice, second choice and so on -is sometimes known as an instant-runoff vote (IRV)

Question 29

strengths of AV

Answer 29

* Easy for voters to identify who is responsible for district policy and hold them accountable because there is only one representative per constituency * Unlike under the SMDP system, AV voters can convey information about their preferences. This is because they get to rank the candidates and not simply vote “yes” for one of them. Strategic incentives ( not ranking real preferences) does occur * Encourages parties and candidates to win the votes from not only their base supporters but their “second preferences” of others

Question 30

Majority- Runoff Two- Round System

Answer 30

-A majoritarian electoral system that has the potential for two rounds of elections. Majority-runoff TRS is a system where voters cast a single vote for a candidate in a single-member district. Any member who obtains an absolute majority of the votes in the first round is elected. If no candidate wins an absolute majority, the top two winners go on to compete in a runoff election one or two weeks later * It is the most common method used in electing presidents

Question 31

strengths of Majority- Runoff Two- Round System

Answer 31

* Voters have more choice than they have in SMDP systems - those who cote for a candidate who “loses” in the first round have a second opportunity to influence who gets elected in the second round. Voters can also change their minds because of new information if the candidate they voted for makes it to the second round * The incentive to vote strategically is reduced because of the two opportunities individuals have to affect the election outcome * This system incentivizes candidates who make it to the second round to look beyond their won electoral base and reach compromises with the leaders of the parties already eliminated to try and win over their supporters. Voters are also not required to rank order candidates with numbers to express their second choice. According to some, this could make them suitable for countries with high illiteracy and low education levels than preference voting system such as the alternative vote * With the majority-runoff TRS, a candidate can claim to have won the support of the majority of voters

Question 32

Proportional Electoral Systems

Answer 32

* The proportional representation (PR) system aims to consciously reduce the disparity between a party’s share of the vote, and it’s share of the seats. Meaning, the goal of the PR system is to produce proportional outcomes. 10 percent of the votes should translate to 10 seats. * All PR systems apply multimember districts because one cannot divide a single seat proportionally

Question 33

strengths of Proportional Representation

Answer 33

* The main strength is that they tend to produce a more accurate translation of votes into seats. This eliminates the possibility that a party wins a large percentage of the votes but only a few legislative seats * There is an argument that PR systems are all but essential in maintaining stability in ethnically and religiously polarized societies (Lijphart, 1990; Norris, 2008). However, this argument is contested by other scholars (read-pg 325)

Question 34

List PR Systems

Answer 34

* Most PR systems involve parties presenting a list of candidates to voters in each multimember district. Parties in turn receive legislative seats in proportion to the overall share of votes going to their list. These type of PR systems are referred to as list PR systems. * All list PR systems are not the same

Question 35

District Magnitude

Answer 35

It is the most important factor influencing the proportionality of an electoral system. This refers to the number of representatives elected in a district. Electoral systems are more proportional when the district magnitude is large because small parties are more likely to win seats

Question 36

Electoral Thresholds

Answer 36

-PR systems have an electoral threshold that gives the minimum percentage of votes a party must win nationally or in a particular district to gain legislative representation -This threshold is either legally imposed – formal threshold, or it exists as a mathematical property of the electoral system – natural threshold The size of the electoral threshold has a strong effect on the proportionality of the electoral system

Question 37

Types of Party Lists

Answer 37

-Closed party list -Open party list

Question 38

Closed party list

Answer 38

the order of candidates elected is determined by the party itself, and voters are not able to express a preference for a particular candidate

Question 39

Open party list

Answer 39

voters can indicate not just their preferred party but their favored candidate within the party .

Question 40

Single Transferable Vote

Answer 40

The only PR system that does not employ a party list is the single transferable vote ( STV). STV is a preferential voting system used in multimember districts where voters rank order the candidates. Candidates must meet a number, called a quota, to win a seat. The process is similar to the AV but applied to multimember districts

Question 41

Mixed Electoral System

Answer 41

when countries elect some legislative representatives with a majoritarian electoral system, and others with proportional electoral system * Most mixed systems have multiple electoral tiers. This is a level at which voters are translated into seats. * The lowest electoral tier is the district or constituency level * The higher tier are formed by grouping different lower-tier constituencies together, this is typically at the regional or national level

Question 42

A majoritarian system is used in the - and a proportional system in the -

Answer 42

lowest tier (district), upper tier (regional or national level)

Question 43

- are more likely to use the majoritarian electoral systems than -

Answer 43

Dictatorships, democracies. * Most PR systems apart from the single transferable vote use party lists and therefore political parties are required. In dictatorships the extent to which political parties are allowed to exist is varied * There is evidence supporting the argument that majoritarian systems are easier to manipulate than the proportional ones