Political Science and Single-ballot System Favours The Two-party System - Coursework Example

Name : xxxxxxxxxxx Institution : xxxxxxxxxxx Course : xxxxxxxxxxx Title : Political Science Tutor : xxxxxxxxxxx @2010 Introduction The notion of political system can be perceived as an analytic tool that is specifically designed for the major purpose of promotion of democracy. The criteria adopted by a state in terms of voting procedures can influence the system of governance. The simple majority voting system is a democratic voting system which is commonly used to choose by ballot legislative members or the top executive, by using a counting system that is exhaustive. One candidate is voted at a time and the process is continuously repeated until the vacancy is filled. Nevertheless gaining total majority votes is not a necessary requirement. The method is most commonly applied in countries such as United Kingdom, India, Canada and United States. The person who acquires most votes is constitutionally declared the winner (Benoit 2007). The two party system on the other hand is a process that is zero sum. The outcomes of the elections are usually precise. The party that gets to win the elections governs the state while the party that looses takes up to carry out checks and balances on the ruling party in order to prevent the party from expanding its governance strategies beyond the requirements of the constitution. It is evident that two dominant parties in a state can actually be influential to the electoral process and the general governance of a state (Leys 1959). The intention of this essay is to present an analysis of how the. ‘Simple-majority single-ballot system favors the two-party system. The approach applied in the evaluation of this statement includes theoretical analysis which is basically from the proponent of the statement; “simple-majority single-ballot system favors the two-party system.” Theoretical Analysis A French political scientist Maurice Duvenrger propagated the statement that that the ‘simple majority single ballot system acts in favor of the two party system’. Duvenrger observed the tendency of using two candidates in the single ballot electoral process. He brings a clear picture of how electoral rules have an impact on the survival and formation of political parties. Duverger’s law is driven by the notion that in the long run rational voters and politicians came to a realization that it is actually hopeless to have more than two parties that are competing in an election at national level. Even though three parties may continue be in contention for a small number of years, a party which embarks on contesting will quickly disappear as everyone comes to recognize that the party will not be the victor in any elections if its support is consistently dispersing. By contrast, the sum of parties in an election that is proportional may be more influenced by social forces as opposed to the opportunity within the system to split without penalty ( Duverger 1972). When evaluating the content of Duvenrger’s law how simple majority voting system acts in favor of the two party system .The very common explanation is based on the fact that the aspect of strategic voting. This aspect is available within the framework of the plurality system, were the system basically acts to reduce the number of parties. This is done through devising an environment with less chances of proportional representation. This is virtually the major reason as to why strategic voting can be perceived as a common method of decreasing the party numbers in a state. In situations whereby for example three parties may be working under the single ballot –simple majority voting system the electors may come to a realization that the votes they cast to the third party are being wasted. Therefore the best option would be to transfer votes to the more supreme parties ( Duverger 1954). The single majority system also institutionalizes and facilitates the two party system through the marginalization of the third party together with their supporting voters. Duverger gives an assertion that this can well be executed using psychological and mechanical factors. The mechanical impact refers to the trend in the single majority voting system of disfavoring small parties and thus making them loose. The mechanical strategy is reinforced using the psychological aspect. When voters come to a realization that they are actually wasting their votes, through voting for the third pray. They would later transfer there ballot to the party that they prefer between the two majority parties. This creates a further Impact on politicians who may have views of being influential within the major party. This results to many politicians abandoning small parties (Carty 1988). Deverger also proposes that the equilibrium level influences voter behavior. It is important to understand the strategic voting behavior of voters. In the single ballot system the strategic voting incentive is entrenched on the number of players available in the game. Most voters would actually vote for the extremist party for the main purpose of dragging the system of governance that they believe in to power. As far as the equilibrium level is concerned voters tend to vote for extreme parties. Nothing specifically assures voters that the equilibrium will purely be satisfactory for the voters. However when applying the aspect of the equilibrium, voters are given an opportunity to play a mixed strategy at any equilibrium (De Sinopoli 2000). The two party system frequently develops from the single ballot system due to the concept of voters obtaining one vote which they cast to one single candidate, were one legislative seat is available . The victor of the seat is selected on the basis of the aspirant with more votes. This makes the system main functions to be serving to rewarding two parties and eliminating the third party. An artificial limit on the level in which a third party can actively take part in politics is created, by the simple majority voting system. For example the Green party of Canada receives partly around 10% of the popular vote however it has never attained any seat in the House of Commons. Such numerical advantages create a limit to the level of political participation of the third parties (Leys 1959). The third party can get an opportunity of coming into the electoral arena if it is able to exploit the short coming of the major parties that are pre-existing, ultimately at expense of the party. For instance, the political disorder in the United States right after the Civil War provided a chance for the Whig Party to be replaced by the Republican Party. This changed half of the political landscape of the Americans. The Whig leadership that had the characteristic of being decentralized failed to make a decisive stand on the issue of slavery, effectively dividing the party along lines of the Mason-Dixon (Ortuño-Ortin 1997). The rural planters of the south, who were at first lured by the Federal infrastructure prospect and schools, speedily aligned themselves to the Democrats who were pro-slavery, while urban professionals and laborer from the northern states, were also exposed to the sudden shift in economic and political power and thus they lost faith in the Whig candidates who were failing, they flocked the progressively more vocal Republican Party who were anti-slavery. The United States thus embarked on having two majority parties that formulated the contemporary two party system (Ortuño-Ortin 1997). In countries were proportional representation is used , particularly where the entire country is structured as a single constituency for instance Israel, the rules of the electoral process deject two-party system; the amount of votes gained by a party acts as a determining factor for the seats won, the new parties therefore can device an electoral niche immediately . Duverger highlights that the utilization of proportional representation (PR) gives less likely chances for the existence of t a two-party system . Nevertheless, other arrangements do not assurance new parties entrée to the governing system. Benoit, (2007), provides an example of a two party system that is stable using a one transferable vote. It is however worth to note that the presidential elections in Israel are won using the simple majority voting system, which basically puts a greater weight on the two party system as opposed to a system that is purely proportional. In despite of the fact that Duverger’s law of highlighting the relationship that exists between the voting system of a nation and the number of political parties. There is wide range of evidence to support his notion of the single ballot system favors the two party systems. However major exceptions have been identified in countries such as India, Great Britain and Canada. Critique of Duverger’s law. Analysis of Indian Party System India can be identified as the words biggest democracies. It has regional parties that are multiple, that have been strongly enforced on the three states; Tripura, Kerala and Bengal. It is argued that the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) act as the preservers of the two party system as propagated by Duverger's law. Considerable interest has been identified on the impacts of electoral rules, mostly those that govern politics within the single-ballot system –simple majority system in India. The major interest highlighted by the argument that ‘the simple-majority single-ballot system favors the two-party system (Duverger 1954). At the end of the day this proposition has developed the shape of a law that is famously identified as Duverger's law. Nevertheless, when using empirical analysis to evaluate this particular this law, the assessment of electoral data has frequently been overlooked, and the main focus being at national level. India categorically follows the single-ballot system Simple-majority system , however the country has several parties not just two main parties, particularly at the state and state level, which is a state of affairs that has resulted to lots of scholars treating India as one of the exceptions to be linked or associated to Duverger's law. Linkages between the national and district level Others scholars have however, raised an argument that the party system in Indian at district level pursues Duverger's law, and therefore using India as a counterexample is not correct. Rekha (2007) utilizes comprehensive dataset to evaluate how applicable Duvergerian Law is in the party level within the districts. Her findings indicated that the two party norm proposed by Duverger was not basically applicable the District level elections involved many candidates and many parties. Rekha’s findings are also similar to another study which was carried out in Canada. Cox highlights that there is nothing logic concerning how elections of the district level influences party structures at the national level. There are other factors that influence bipartism nationally but not solely on the basis of district level of the electoral structure. The formation of linkages between districts is derived from the economies of scale which determine the prime minister or the president of a country. The surfacing of national parties changes the perception of strategic voters who may utilize their votes not only to influence the election outcome at the district level but also at the national level. When voters get involved in strategic voting that is nationally oriented, different voting behavior emerge this may not necessary lead to the formation of the two party system within a country The concept of Strategic Entry Duverger bases his argument on the notion of on strategic entry: this is because the third party candidates may come to an advanced realization there is a huge probability of them being victims of strategic abandonment by voters, they therefore choose to not be part of the race. The limitations that are linked to this particular argument include aspects such as viability. The entry decisions made by voters may not be precisely determined as being viable. For instance it was not precise if Dean or Kerry would win the Dem nomination in 2004. If it was probably a race that was three against Bush, it would have not been necessary for Dean to withdraw from the race. The second aspect is centered on political goals, Duverger made an assumption that politicians only have short term goals therefore they may be willing to withdraw their participation in a particular election if subjected to a third party which is not fancied by voters (Alesina & Rosenthal 1995). The roles played by political parties in a country also influence the nature of the party systems. This aspect is therefore a device that is long –term. In situations whereby party labels are established the third part is deterred from entry in case they have two characteristics candidacy satisfaction and conveying a certain amount of habitual votes into candidate’s total. Duverger’s prediction therefore is workable in conditions whereby the entry reduction argument part proceeds if there is a party system that is structured. It is however true that political aspirants prefer to join the major parties with big labels. However some candidates prefer to use the third party option with intent to crate a new image which the voters can choose from (William 1982). Cox a political scientist shows that different system of elections produce party systems that are different even within the same state at one particular time. The important inquiry as to whether the single-ballot system Simple-majority applies to district wide or nation wide elections and whether elections are best applicable at the post entry or the pre-entry level. Cox arguably highlights that voters will defiantly vote for any particular candidate due to the fact that strategic voting does not enhance wasting of votes to any particular candidate who is unlikely to win the elections. Elites in politics only invest capital in candidates who are basically serious not opportunists (Cox 1997). The effect of the equilibrium as proposed as proposed by Duverger is concerned with two processes which he referred to as depolarization and polarization. Polarization happens in the single member system within the simple majority. The rules of these criteria give rise an outcome that is disproportional that basically rewards large parties with more seats that the allocation of their votes. On the other hand small parties are pushed to share lesser votes than their vote shares. Depolarization on the other hand involves the process by which voters may favor small parties knowing well that the small parties have a probability of winning seats. Duverger’s application of the equilibrium may therefore not be fully effective in influencing the number of political parties in a country. This is because shifts in the equilibrium level may change at any particular time. Finally another source of uncertainty in Duverger’s law is surrounded on the relationship Between the mechanical effects and the psychological effects, Mechanical impacts are supposed to be applied in the accounting field but not within the political context, if we make an assumption that electoral systems are supposed to operate mechanically, like deterministic machines whose function is transformation of inputs and outputs. In spite of the fact that mechanically effects are usually measured, their function should be non –stochastic implying that they should give rise to the same seat distribution each time when provided with similar vote distribution. Yet again not many empirical studies have estimated the mechanical impacts in terms of being stochastic (Ann 1994). In addition the use of the psychological impacts to give backing to his law is also controversial. Vote inputs are not automatically controlled and determined through using empirical setting,. The psychological factor should operate as a stochastic function, because there may be a variety of factors which may influence parties not to follow the depolarization and polarization incentives. Some parties may receive votes in despite of the fact that they are to be deterred from getting any votes. In this respect Duverger’s law may seem to be controversial, Conclusion Duverger’s law Single-ballot system –simple majority system can be analyzed as practical. His comparative examination of party systems resulted to investigations concerned with the sources of dualism, or the deliberation of activities of political parties into two major parties. Duverger concluded that national factors have a great contribution in deciding the party system structures. However the two party systems is linked to institutional arrangements. The above presentation provided basic facts that support Duverger’s notion. It is however important to take note of the fact that opponents of his theory also provide practical explanations, which lower the practicability of Duverger’s law. Bibliography Ann, A, 1994, Models of Strategic Choice in Politics, University of Michigan Press, Michigan Alesina, A & Rosenthal, H, 1995, Partisan Politics, Divided Government, and the Economy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Besley, T, & S. Coate 1997, “An economic model of representative Democracy”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 85-114. Benoit, K, 2007, "Electoral Laws as Political Consequences: Explaining the Origins and Change of Electoral Institutions", Annual Review of Political Science 10: 363–390 Carty, .K.1988, From Predominance to Competition, in Parties and Party Systems in Liberal Democracies, Routledge, London. Cox, G, 1997, Making Votes Count, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Colomer, M., 2005, It's Parties that Choose Electoral Systems (or Duverger's Law Upside Down De Sinopoli, F, 2000, “Sophisticated voting and equilibrium refinements Under plurality rule”, Journal on Social Choice and Welfare. Duverger, M, 1954, Political parties, Methuen, London. Duverger, M, 1972, "Factors in a Two-Party and Multiparty System," in Party Politics and Pressure Groups, Thomas Y. Crowell, New York, pp. 23-32. Fey, M, 1997, “Stability and Coordination in Duverger’s Law: A Formal Model of Preelection Polls and Strategic Voting”, American Political Science Review, 91, 135-147. Leys, C.1959, “Models, Theories and the Theory of Political Parties”, Political Studies, 7, 127-146. Myerson, R & R, Weber, 1993, “A Theory of Voting Equilibrium”, American Political Science Review, 87, 102-114. Ortuño-Ortin, I, 1997, “A spatial model of political competition and proportional representation”, Social Choice and Welfare, 14, 427-438. Palfrey, T, 1989, A mathematical proof of Duverger’s law, Oxford university press, London.  Sartori, G, 1995, Comparative Consitutional Engineering, An Inquiry into structures, incentives and outcomes. Rekha, D, 2007,"Duverger's Law and the Size of the Indian Party System," Party Politics, ,pg 539-561.   William, H, 1982, "The Two-party System and Duverger's Law: An Essay on the History of Political Science" American Political Science Review, . Read More

The single majority system also institutionalizes and facilitates the two party system through the marginalization of the third party together with their supporting voters. Duverger gives an assertion that this can well be executed using psychological and mechanical factors. The mechanical impact refers to the trend in the single majority voting system of disfavoring small parties and thus making them loose. The mechanical strategy is reinforced using the psychological aspect. When voters come to a realization that they are actually wasting their votes, through voting for the third pray.

They would later transfer there ballot to the party that they prefer between the two majority parties. This creates a further Impact on politicians who may have views of being influential within the major party. This results to many politicians abandoning small parties (Carty 1988). Deverger also proposes that the equilibrium level influences voter behavior. It is important to understand the strategic voting behavior of voters. In the single ballot system the strategic voting incentive is entrenched on the number of players available in the game.

Most voters would actually vote for the extremist party for the main purpose of dragging the system of governance that they believe in to power. As far as the equilibrium level is concerned voters tend to vote for extreme parties. Nothing specifically assures voters that the equilibrium will purely be satisfactory for the voters. However when applying the aspect of the equilibrium, voters are given an opportunity to play a mixed strategy at any equilibrium (De Sinopoli 2000). The two party system frequently develops from the single ballot system due to the concept of voters obtaining one vote which they cast to one single candidate, were one legislative seat is available .

The victor of the seat is selected on the basis of the aspirant with more votes. This makes the system main functions to be serving to rewarding two parties and eliminating the third party. An artificial limit on the level in which a third party can actively take part in politics is created, by the simple majority voting system. For example the Green party of Canada receives partly around 10% of the popular vote however it has never attained any seat in the House of Commons. Such numerical advantages create a limit to the level of political participation of the third parties (Leys 1959).

The third party can get an opportunity of coming into the electoral arena if it is able to exploit the short coming of the major parties that are pre-existing, ultimately at expense of the party. For instance, the political disorder in the United States right after the Civil War provided a chance for the Whig Party to be replaced by the Republican Party. This changed half of the political landscape of the Americans. The Whig leadership that had the characteristic of being decentralized failed to make a decisive stand on the issue of slavery, effectively dividing the party along lines of the Mason-Dixon (Ortuño-Ortin 1997).

The rural planters of the south, who were at first lured by the Federal infrastructure prospect and schools, speedily aligned themselves to the Democrats who were pro-slavery, while urban professionals and laborer from the northern states, were also exposed to the sudden shift in economic and political power and thus they lost faith in the Whig candidates who were failing, they flocked the progressively more vocal Republican Party who were anti-slavery. The United States thus embarked on having two majority parties that formulated the contemporary two party system (Ortuño-Ortin 1997).

In countries were proportional representation is used , particularly where the entire country is structured as a single constituency for instance Israel, the rules of the electoral process deject two-party system; the amount of votes gained by a party acts as a determining factor for the seats won, the new parties therefore can device an electoral niche immediately .

Read More