What is an electoral system. Electoral system in the Russian Federation (types, types)

Conducting elections and determining the results of voting.

Under the electoral system (in the narrow sense) is understood only as a way of determining the results of elections, i.e. final stage of the election. Of course, the application of one or another electoral system has an impact on the entire organization of elections, but main point electoral system - determining the results of elections.

Distinguish the following types electoral systems:

1. majoritarian (from French word"majority");
2. proportional;
3. mixed.

Majoritarian electoral system

The main feature of the majoritarian electoral system is that those candidates (list of candidates) are considered elected which received the majority of voters.

Varieties of the majority system:

1. majority system of relative majority;
2. majority system of absolute majority;
3. majority system of a qualified majority.

Majoritarian system of relative majority- this is a system in which a candidate (list of candidates) is considered elected who has received, in comparison with another the largest number votes, regardless of how many voters voted against that candidate. Such a system is used in the election of representative bodies, for example, in the USA, Great Britain, India. Under a plurality majoritarian system, if only one candidate is nominated, then the vote may not take place, since it will be sufficient for the candidate to vote for himself. After all, having received at least one vote, he will gain the most a large number of votes, since there are no other contenders.

In our country, a majority electoral system elects half State Duma, those who run in single-member constituencies, as well as most of the representative bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local self-government. Some believe that the majority system of relative majority most fully reflects the voters. But it's not. Suppose that there are 10,000 voters in three constituencies. Candidates for deputies were nominated from three parties: A, B and C. As a result of the elections in the first constituency, the candidate from party A collected 9.5 thousand votes. Party B candidate - 100 votes, Party C candidate - 400 votes. In another constituency, the votes were distributed as follows: a candidate from party A - 3.3 thousand, party B - 3.4 thousand, party C - 3.3 thousand votes. In the third constituency, the candidate from party A received 3.4 thousand votes, from party B - 3.5 thousand votes, from party C - 3.1 thousand votes. As a result, in three constituencies, party A, which received 16.2 thousand votes, will receive one deputy seat, party B, whose candidate was voted for by 7 thousand voters, will receive 2 deputy mandates, and party C, for which 6.2 thousand votes were cast, in general will not receive a single deputy mandate.

This example is evidence of the imperfection of the electoral system of the relative majority and confirmation of the importance of electoral geography.

Majoritarian system of absolute majority(valid in France and some other countries, until 1993 operated in Russia) stipulates that the winner-candidate (list of candidates) in the elections must receive more than half of all recognized valid votes (50% plus one vote at least). If no candidate receives more than half of the votes, then a second round of voting is usually held, in which, as a rule, only two candidates who have collected nai more votes in the first round.

Be that as it may, the majoritarian system of an absolute majority in the election of deputies of parliament or another collegial body is a rather intricate, cumbersome system that requires fairly large financial outlays. In this regard, the majority system of the relative majority is cheaper, and when using it, it is easier to determine the winner.

On the other hand, in those countries where elections are held according to the majority system of relative majority, candidates who are supported by far less than half of the voters can and often do win elections. It turns out that the will of the minority prevails, and the will of the majority is not reflected in the election results.

Under a majoritarian system of relative majority, a significant part of the votes of the electorate is wasted, since candidates for whom a minority cast their votes are not considered elected.

Let's take for example the same three constituencies with 10,000 voters each and the same three competing parties: A, B, and C. Suppose a candidate from party A received 9,000 votes in the elections in the first constituency, a candidate from party B - 100 votes, and the candidate from party B - 900 votes. In another constituency, the candidate from party A received 900 votes, the candidate from party B - 5.1 thousand votes, the candidate from party C - 4 thousand votes. In the third constituency, 2,000 votes were cast for a candidate from party A, 5,100 votes for a candidate from party B, and 2,900 votes for a candidate from party C. In this hypothetical case, party A, which collected 11.9 thousand votes, will receive only 1 deputy seat. Party B, for whose candidate 10,300 voters voted, will receive 2 deputy mandates, and Party C, for whose candidate 7,800 votes were cast, will not be represented in the constituency at all. The conclusion is the same: the imperfection of the electoral system of the absolute majority and the significance of the so-called electoral geography.

The majoritarian electoral system of absolute majority with repeat voting is most often observed in the election of officials. In our country, according to such an electoral system, for example, the President of the Russian Federation is elected.

Qualified Majority Majoritarian System- This is a system in which a candidate who receives a predetermined qualified (for example, 2/3, 3/4, etc.) number of votes is considered elected. This system is rarely used in world practice.

proportional electoral system

A proportional electoral system is such a system, which is based on the principle of distribution of deputy mandates in proportion to the number of votes received by each list of candidates. The proportional system is used when holding elections of deputies to representative bodies of state power, when political parties take part in them, which form lists of their candidates in multi-mandate constituencies.

The distribution of deputy mandates under a proportional system is carried out in a number of countries by establishing an electoral quota (electoral meter). It is obtained as a result of dividing the total number of votes cast and recognized as valid by the number of electoral mandates falling on this constituency.

More

For example, in the constituency during the elections, a total of 98,385 votes were cast. 5 seats in the representative body are subject to replacement. Therefore, the electoral quota (meter) is 19,677 votes. But in different constituencies, a different number of voters may appear at the polling stations, which means that in other constituencies there will be a different electoral quota (meter). In some countries, the law establishes a single number of votes for all constituencies required to elect one deputy (single number method) in order to best support the principle of equality. However, this practice has not become widespread.

After determining the electoral quota (meter) from each party list, deputy mandates are received by as many people as the number of times the electoral meter (quota) fits into the number of votes collected by this party in the elections. Thus, in the electoral district, where only 98,385 votes were cast, three political parties competed for five deputy mandates. After counting the votes, the following results were obtained: 56.7 thousand people voted for the list of party A, 32.3 thousand votes were cast for the list of party B, and 9385 votes for the list of party C. The seats in the elected body are distributed as follows. The electoral meter (quota) is doubled by the number of votes received by party A, and once by the number of votes collected by party B. Party C has not yet received a single mandate. But only 3 mandates were distributed. In addition, the electoral meter (quota) does not fit an integer number of times in the number of votes collected by each of the parties. In each case, some remainder appears. The question of how to take into account these residuals is one of the most difficult in determining the results of voting under a proportional electoral system.

There are several ways to get out of this predicament. Thus, in the legislation of a number of countries, the rule of the largest remainder is enshrined, which means the largest remainder of votes obtained after the distribution of mandates between parties through the use of a voting meter or a natural quota. At the same time, the remainder is understood as the number of votes received by the party, which is less than the electoral quota. In our example, party A has a balance of 17,346 votes, party B has 12,623, and party C has 9,385 votes. Therefore, first of all, party A will get one more seat, since it has the largest balance, party B will also get another seat, since its balance is the second largest. Party B remains without mandates. Five mandates are distributed in this way: party A - three mandates, party B - two mandates, party C - none. At the same time, the principle of proportionality is somewhat distorted, since in the end, in order to receive one mandate, each party had to collect different amount votes, and the votes received by party B were not counted at all. This method of distribution of mandates is called the method of T. Hare (after the name of the inventor).

After the distribution of mandates between party lists, the question arises of the procedure for determining specific candidates who will receive the mandates of deputies. The fact is that, as a rule, there are more candidates on the list than mandates received by voting results. There are two systems of "hard" and "soft" lists.

With "hard" candidates, the order of candidates is determined by the party during the formation of the list: deputies become deputies in the order of "order" indicated in the list.

With "flexible" lists, voters are given the opportunity to change the order, the order of candidates by preferential (from the French word "preference") voting. A feature of preferential voting is that the voter has the right to indicate in what order mandates should be given to candidates within the party list, if this list has scored required amount votes.

More about the barrier

In a number of countries, when applying a proportional electoral system, there is a protective barrier.

In this case, parties that have received a smaller percentage of votes than the law establishes are not allowed to distribute deputy mandates, even if they receive such a number of votes in one or another constituency or in a nationwide constituency as a whole that is sufficient to elect a small number of deputies. The protective barrier is not the same in different countries: 1.5% in Israel, 4% in Bulgaria, 5% in Germany, 8% in Egypt, 10% in Turkey. In the elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation in 1995 and in 1999. acted 5% protective barrier.

The barrier is designed to ensure that large parties that really have influence among the population are represented in parliament, so that deputies in parliament are not split into numerous groups due to petty and petty interests. The protective barrier also pursues the goal of having the government rely in parliament on certain large parties, and in parliamentary republics and parliamentary monarchies - on the party majority. He, of course, distorts the proportional electoral system, the meaning of which is a fair distribution of seats between parties, but he is justified by necessity.

Opponents of the proportional system point out the impersonality of party lists as one of its shortcomings. After all, voters vote for lists drawn up by parties, that is, for the party, for their leaders, and not for specific deputies. Parties include in the lists, as a rule, as many candidates as deputies are elected to the represented body of power from the given constituency. Candidates standing under the first serial numbers in the list become deputies. But it would be a clear exaggeration to believe that voters vote exclusively for party lists, without knowing anything about specific candidates.

Against the proportional system put forward another argument: the impossibility under certain circumstances to ensure a stable majority in collegial representative bodies of power, which in a number of countries is necessary to form a government. Therefore, in some countries, choosing one or another proportional electoral system, they deliberately go for the introduction of such an electoral system, which somewhat distorts the proportionality of representation. In countries where, as a rule, as a result of elections for a long time it is not possible to form a stable majority in parliament, in many cases distortions of proportionality in favor of large parties are preferred. After all, the absence of a parliamentary majority for a long time (especially in parliamentary states) can lead to difficulties in governing the country, which can lead to destabilization of political life, and this is already fraught with undermining democratic foundations. In countries where large parties or blocs of parties regularly win the majority of seats in parliament (moreover, for quite a long time the majority may be with one party or periodically move from one party to another), the goal is often set to ensure adequate representation in parliament in order to develop democracy. various political forces, for which they introduce an electoral system in which proportionality is somewhat distorted in favor of small parties.

Some authors, comparing the majoritarian and proportional systems, try to identify their advantages and disadvantages, proceeding from the premise that the electoral system used is designed to ensure the solution of two main tasks:

1. constant interaction of the representative body with the population that this body represents;
2. ensuring the expression of the general will, the mood of the represented population.

The authors of these studies in relation to the elections of local governments come to the conclusion that the majority system of elections in single-mandate constituencies is the most popular in Russia. However, they highlight a number of advantages and disadvantages of this system.

The advantages usually include the proximity of elected deputies to their voters: deputies are well aware of their constituencies, the interests of their residents and the deputy, and his political qualities are familiar to voters. The disadvantage is the following: the representative body of local self-government formed on this basis does not have a single project for the development of the territory municipality; each deputy seeks to solve the problems of his constituency.

The proportional electoral system, on the other hand, has a number of opposite qualities: it weakens the personal ties and personal responsibility of the deputies to the voters, but at the same time, the representative body is the spokesman for the common interest, it has an integral project for the development of the municipality.

The problem of applying the proportional system lies in the underdevelopment political structure society, the absence of stable electoral associations at the municipal level. This refers not so much to purely political municipal electoral associations as the so-called municipal (town hall) parties. This term is used to designate associations of voters in municipalities on the basis of a commonality of views regarding the preferred ways of developing territories.

According to the researchers, the use of a mixed system is more appropriate.

Mixed electoral system

A mixed electoral system is used in the election of deputies and combines elements of both majoritarian and proportional systems.

In the legal literature, two approaches to understanding the electoral system are common: broad and narrow.

Broadly speaking, the electoral system understood as a set public relations, emerging about the formation of public authorities and local self-government through the implementation of the electoral rights of citizens. With this approach, the electoral system includes the principles and conditions for the participation of citizens in elections, the procedure for their appointment, preparation and conduct, the range of subjects of the electoral process, the rules for establishing voting results and determining election results. The electoral system in a broad sense, in essence, is identified with the election campaign, which is the activity in preparation for the elections, carried out from the day official publication decisions on calling elections until the day the commission organizing the elections submits a report on the expenditure of budgetary funds allocated for their conduct. For this reason, the use of the concept of an electoral system in a broad sense is hardly justified.

Narrow understanding of the electoral system As a rule, it is associated with the methods (techniques) of establishing the voting results and determining the winner in the elections and is considered as a kind of legal formula by which the results of the election campaign are determined at the final stage of the elections. So, in accordance with Art. 23 of the Federal Law "On general principles local government organizations in Russian Federation» under the electoral system during the municipal elections understood conditions for recognizing a candidate (candidates) as elected (elected), lists of candidates - admitted to the distribution of deputy mandates, as well as the procedure for distributing deputy mandates between the lists of candidates and within the lists of candidates. At the same time, one should not forget that the rules for tabulating the results of voting depend, in addition to the methods for determining the result, on a number of electoral actions that have a direct impact on the decision to elect a particular candidate. Based on this, in a legal sense, it is preferable to link a narrow understanding of the electoral system with a set of norms that fix the rules:

• formation of constituencies;
• nomination of candidates (lists of candidates);
• role definitions political parties(electoral associations) in elections;
• approval of the form of the ballot;
• determination of election results and determination of winners, including the distribution of deputy mandates among political parties (electoral associations);
• conducting, if necessary, a repeat voting (second round of elections);
• filling vacant seats.

Types of electoral systems

In their totality, they give the most complete picture of the elements that form the electoral system, the various combinations and content of which determine selection various kinds electoral systems.

In the history of the development of electoral legislation, many approaches to the design of electoral systems have been formed. At the same time, the choice of one or another type of electoral system is one of the key issues in the political life of the country, the solution of which is significantly influenced by the state of democratic development and the balance of political forces. It is no coincidence that the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation came to this conclusion. In the ruling of November 20, 1995 on the refusal to accept for consideration the request of a group of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation and the request of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to verify the constitutionality of a number of provisions of the Federal Law of June 21, 1995 "On the election of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation » The Court emphasized that the choice of one or another version of the electoral system and its fixing in the electoral law depends on specific socio-political conditions and is a matter of political expediency. AT Russian conditions this choice is made by the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in accordance with the rules of legislative procedure. This circumstance, however, does not mean at all that the issue of the electoral system is purely political and lacks legal meaning. The legal significance of the electoral system consists in the proper legislative consolidation of the entire set of rules governing relations related to the determination of election results and forming the legal design of the electoral system, including the consolidation of its various types.

The current electoral legislation provides for the possibility of using the following types of electoral systems: majoritarian, proportional and mixed (majority-proportional) electoral system.

Majoritarian electoral system

The point is to divide the territory where elections are held into constituencies in which voters vote personally for certain candidates. To be elected, a candidate (candidates, if the elections are held in multi-member constituencies) must receive a majority of the votes of the voters who took part in the voting. From a legal point of view, the majoritarian electoral system is distinguished by its universality of application, which allows it to be used for the election of both collegial bodies and individual officials. The right to nominate candidates under this electoral system is vested both in citizens by way of self-nomination and in political parties (electoral associations). In the event of the formation of vacant mandates, due, among other things, to the early termination of the powers of deputies (elected officials), it is mandatory to hold new (additional, early or repeat) elections.

Majoritarian electoral system has varieties. Depending on the electoral districts formed, majoritarian electoral systems are distinguished, which involve voting in a single electoral district, single-seat and multi-seat electoral districts. The majority system based on a single constituency is used only in the election of officials. When deputies of legislative (representative) bodies of state power, representative bodies of municipalities are elected, either single-member or multi-member constituencies are used. And maximum number mandates per one multi-member constituency cannot exceed five. However, this restriction does not apply to elections to local self-government bodies. rural settlement, as well as another municipality, the boundaries of the multi-member constituency of which coincide with the boundaries of the polling station.

There are majoritarian systems of relative, absolute and qualified majority. The relative majority system assumes that in order to be elected, it is required to get the largest number of votes of voters in relation to other candidates. It can be used in the elections of deputies of legislative (representative) bodies of state power, representative bodies of municipalities, as well as in the elections of heads of municipalities.

Under an absolute majority system, to elect a candidate, it is necessary that he receives more than half of the votes of the number of voters who took part in the voting. If none of the candidates manages to gain such a number of votes, a second ballot is held for the two candidates for whom the largest number of votes were cast in the first round of elections. To win in the second round using such a system, it is enough to gain a relative majority of votes. The absolute majority system is used in the elections of the President of the Russian Federation, and also, if it is provided for by the law of the subject of the Federation, in the elections of heads of municipalities. In principle, one cannot exclude its use in the elections of deputies of legislative (representative) bodies of state power, representative bodies of municipalities, but such cases are unknown to the current electoral legislation.

The system of qualified majority is quite rare. It is based on the fact that in order to win elections, it is necessary not only to get one or another majority of votes, but a majority fixed in the law (at least 1/3, 2/3, 3/4) of the number of voters who voted. At present, it is practically not used, although earlier cases of its use took place in some subjects of the Federation. Thus, the now repealed Law of Primorsky Territory of September 28, 1999 "On the election of the governor of Primorsky Territory" provided that the candidate who received the largest number of votes, provided that it was at least 35% of the number of voters who took part in the vote.

proportional electoral system

The following features are characteristic. Its application is limited to elections of deputies of legislative (representative) bodies; it does not apply to the election of officials. Only political parties (electoral associations) have the right to nominate candidates. Under such a system, voters do not vote personally for candidates, but for lists of candidates (party lists) nominated by electoral associations, and lists of candidates who have overcome the barrier, i.e., who have scored the minimum established by law, are allowed to distribute deputy seats. required number votes, which cannot exceed 1% of the number of voters who took part in the voting. The resulting vacancies will be mixed up by the following candidates from the lists of candidates (party lists) admitted to the distribution of mandates, as a result of which the by-elections not provided.

Russian legislation knows two types of proportional electoral system, due to the use of closed (hard) or open (soft) lists of candidates. When voting by closed lists, a voter has the right to vote only for one or another list of candidates as a whole. Open lists allow a voter to vote not only for a specific list of candidates, but also for one or more candidates within that list. In our country, a clear preference is given to closed lists. Voting by open lists is provided only in a few subjects of the Federation (Republic of Kalmykia, Tver region, Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug).

The proportional electoral system is used in the elections of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. In the subjects of the Federation in its pure form, it is rare (Dagestan, Ingushetia, Amur Region, Sverdlovsk region, Saint Petersburg). As for municipal elections, the proportional electoral system is generally uncharacteristic for them. A rare exception in this regard is the city of Spass k-Dalniy of Primorsky Krai, whose charter provides for the election of all deputies of the city district on party lists.

Mixed electoral system

A mixed (majority-proportional) electoral system is a combination of majoritarian and proportional systems with a statutory number of deputy mandates distributed over each of them. Its application allows you to combine the advantages and smooth out the shortcomings of the majority and proportional systems. At the same time, political parties (electoral associations) are given the opportunity to nominate the same persons as candidates both on a party list and in single-mandate (multi-mandate) constituencies. The law only requires that in the event of simultaneous nomination in a single-mandate (multi-mandate) constituency and in the list of candidates, information about this must be indicated in the ballot prepared for voting in the corresponding single-mandate (multi-mandate) constituency

The mixed system is currently used in the elections of legislative (representative) bodies of state power in almost all subjects of the Federation. This is due to the fact that the Federal Law “On the Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in a Referendum of Citizens of the Russian Federation” (Article 35) requires that at least half of the deputy mandates in the legislative (representative) body of state power of a constituent entity of the Federation or in one of its chambers were subject to distribution among the lists of candidates put forward by electoral associations, in proportion to the number of votes received by each of the lists of candidates.

When holding elections of deputies of representative bodies of municipalities, the mixed majority-proportional system is used much less frequently. In all likelihood, this is due to the fact that federal legislation does not require the mandatory use of elements of the proportional system in relation to the municipal level of formation of representative bodies of power.

Introduction:
In Russian legal and scientific literature, two different concepts are used
electoral system. Two terms are used to distinguish them: "electoral
system in the broad sense" and "electoral system in the narrow sense".
The concept of the electoral system:
The electoral system in a broad sense is a set of legal norms that form
suffrage. Suffrage is a set of legal norms,
governing the participation of citizens in elections. Unlike many foreign
constitutions, the Constitution of the Russian Federation does not contain a special chapter on the right to vote.
The electoral system in the narrow sense is a set of legal norms that determine
voting results. Based on these legal norms, the following are determined: the type of elections, the type
constituencies, the form and content of the ballot, the rules for counting votes and
etc.
Depending on what kind of electoral system (in the narrow sense) will be
used on specific elections, results with the same results
voting may vary.
Types of electoral systems
Types of electoral systems are determined by the principles of formation
representative body of power and the procedure for the distribution of mandates based on the results
voting. In fact, there are as many types of electoral systems in the world as there are
there are countries that form governments through elections. But for
centuries-old history of elections, basic types of electoral systems were created, based on
based on elections around the world.
Three main types of electoral systems:
1.
Majoritarian (French majorité - majority) electoral system. According to
majoritarian electoral system, a candidate who receives
more votes.
There are three types of majority system:
absolute majority - the candidate must gain 50% + 1 vote;
relative majority - the candidate needs to score the largest
number of votes. However, this number of votes may be less than 50% of the
all votes;
supermajority - the candidate must collect in advance
established majority vote. Such an established majority
always more than 50% of all votes - 2/3 or 3/4.
proportional electoral system.
This is a system for the formation of elected bodies of power through the party
representation. Political parties and/or political movements
put forward lists of their candidates. The voter votes for one of these
2.

lists. The mandates are distributed in proportion to the votes received by each
party.
3.

Mixed electoral system.
An electoral system in which part of the mandates to a representative body
power is distributed according to the majority system, and part of the proportional
system. That is, two electoral systems are used in parallel.
4.
hybrid electoral system.
It is a synthesis of majoritarian and proportional electoral systems.
Candidates are nominated according to the proportional system (by party
lists), and voting - by majority (personally for each candidate).
Electoral system of the Russian Federation
The electoral system in Russia includes several main types
electoral systems.
The electoral system of the Russian Federation is described by the following federal laws:


No. 19FZ "On the Election of the President of the Russian Federation"
No. 51FZ "On the election of deputies of the State Duma of the Federal
Assembly of the Russian Federation"
No. 67-FZ “On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in
referendum of citizens of the Russian Federation"
No. 138FZ "On Ensuring the Constitutional Rights of Citizens of the Russian
Federations to elect and be elected to local self-government bodies"
No. 184FZ "On the general principles of organizing legislative



(representative) and executive bodies of state power of the subjects
Russian Federation"
Before the adoption of the relevant law in 2002, in the regional elections of the highest
officials in some subjects of the Russian Federation used varieties
majoritarian system, not related to either the system of absolute or the system
relative majority. The candidate was required to obtain a relative
majority of votes, but not less than 25% of the number of citizens included in the lists
voters, and in some subjects of the Russian Federation - at least 25% of the number of voters,
those who took part in the voting. Now all regional elections are held on
the same principles for all.
When electing senior officials (president, governor, mayor), the
majoritarian electoral system of absolute majority. If none of
candidates did not win an absolute majority of votes, a second round is scheduled, where
two candidates with a relative majority of the votes pass.
In elections to the representative body of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, a mixed
electoral system. During elections to the representative body of the municipal
education, it is possible to use both a mixed electoral system and
majority system of relative majority.
From 2007 to 2011, elections to the State Duma were held on a proportional basis.
system. Since 2016, half of the deputies (225) of the State Duma of the Russian Federation will
be elected in single-member constituencies by the majority system, and the other half -

The electoral system is a special political institution, characterized by a set of rules and norms, on the basis of which the ratio of the legislative and executive branches of power is determined, their legitimacy is achieved or withdrawn. The electoral system through elections allows you to form a certain type of organization of power, to ensure the participation of society in the formation government agencies authorities. The successful holding of elections and the recognition by the majority of society of their results is an important sign of this society to solve existing problems by peaceful political means.

The most important components of the electoral system are the electoral right and the electoral process.

Suffrage is a set of legal norms on the procedure for elections, which includes the political right of citizens to elect (active right) and to be elected (passive right), as well as electoral laws and other acts regulating the election process. The electoral process as a set of actions in the organization and implementation of elections is a practical and organizational component of the electoral system, based on the electoral law and consists of several successive stages (setting the date of elections, formation of constituencies and precincts, formation of election commissions, nomination and registration of candidates, voting and establishing results).

In the practice of modern democratic states, there are nationwide parliamentary and presidential elections; elections to regional authorities and local self-government.

Types of electoral systems

AT modern Russia Depending on the level of power being formed, majoritarian, proportional or mixed electoral systems are used.

(1) the majoritarian electoral system is based on the majority principle, i.e. The winner is the candidate who receives the most votes. The majority of votes can be absolute (50% + 1 vote) and relative (more than the opponent). The majority system of an absolute majority, if none of the candidates has won an absolute majority of votes, involves a second round of voting, where two candidates who have received a relative majority of votes go.

The President of Russia is elected by the majority system of an absolute majority. According to the same system, the heads of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation were elected from 1991 with a break from 2005 to 2011. In 2012, in accordance with the Federal Law of May 2, 2012 No. 40-FZ “On Amendments to the Federal Law “On the General Principles of Organization of Legislative (Representative) and Executive Bodies of State Power of the Subjects of the Russian Federation” and the Federal Law “On Basic Guarantees electoral rights and the right to participate in a referendum of citizens of the Russian Federation, direct elections of heads of regions of the Russian Federation were returned. On April 2, 2013, at the initiative of President V.V. Putin, the Law was amended, giving the subjects of the federation the right to replace the popular elections of their heads with a vote in parliament on several candidates.

(2) the proportional electoral system assumes the distribution of seats in parliament in accordance with the number of votes received in the elections according to party lists: each party receives a strictly defined number of seats in parliament, which is the sum of the number of mandates received by it in each constituency.

In Russia, such a system worked during the formation of the State Duma and regional parliaments from 2007 to 2011.

The 2007 State Duma elections were the first to use the proportional system. In addition, the electoral threshold for parties was raised from 5% to 7%; the lower turnout threshold and the ability to vote "against all" were removed; parties were forbidden to unite in party blocs.

The elections to the State Duma in 2011 were the first and last, in which the parties that received from 5 to 6% of the vote received one mandate in the chamber, and those who collected from 6 to 7% received two mandates each. However, none of the parties was able to show a similar result. At the same time, all four parties that were represented in the lower house of the Parliament of the 5th convocation (KPRF, LDPR, United Russia, Just Russia) retained their representation in the State Duma of the 6th convocation. At the same time, no other party entered the federal parliament.

(3) a proportional-majority or mixed electoral system involves the combination of two types of systems in elections to a particular government body.

During the elections to the State Duma in 1993, 1995, 1999, 2003. 225 deputies were elected according to the proportional system in a single federal district with a barrier of 5%, the other 225 deputies - in single-mandate districts (majority system of relative majority).

Elections to the State Duma in 2016 will again be held according to a mixed system: one half of the deputies (225) will be elected in single-member districts according to the majoritarian system of relative majority, the second half - in a single electoral district according to the proportional system with a 5% threshold. At least one constituency will be formed on the territory of each constituent entity of the Russian Federation, if necessary (in densely populated regions) there will be more constituencies (Federal Law No. 20-FZ of February 22, 2014 “On Elections of Deputies of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation”).

According to the current legislation, the parties that have entered the parliament will be able to nominate their candidates in the presidential elections in Russia without collecting signatures. At the same time, all parties that receive at least 3% of the votes in the elections will have a number of state benefits and privileges: direct admission to the next elections to the State Duma and elections to legislative (representative) bodies of state power in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, which will be held no later than next elections to the State Duma; reimbursement of all expenses for the past elections and increased financial security for the entire period until the next elections.

Single voting day

The peculiarity of the electoral system in a particular country also concerns the voting day. As a rule, two main approaches are used when setting the voting day - either elections are scheduled for any day (usually a weekend) when the powers of the relevant body or official expire (in case of early termination of powers, there is a separate procedure established by the constitution and laws of the country), or single voting day.

For example, in the USSR, elections to the Soviets of People's Deputies (except for the Supreme Soviet of the USSR) were held simultaneously - in March. In post-Soviet Russia, elections at various levels were not synchronized. As a result, a situation of "permanent elections" has developed in the country - practically every Sunday in any of the regions, elections of the regional or local level were held.

In 2004, changes were made to the electoral legislation, in accordance with which a single voting day was introduced for elections at the regional and local levels - the first or second Sunday in March. At the same time, in some cases, it was allowed to schedule elections for the first or second Sunday of October, or simultaneously with the elections to the State Duma, and in exceptional cases - for any day. At the same time, the elections of the President of Russia, starting from 2000, were held in March. And elections to the State Duma, starting from 1993, are held in December. At the same time, they were not strictly tied to a single voting day. These terms could be shifted in the event of early termination of the powers of the President of Russia or the dissolution of the State Duma.

Since 2013, elections have been held on the second Sunday in September. On September 14, 2014, election campaigns were held at various levels, including elections of heads of 30 constituent entities of the Russian Federation (11 scheduled and 19 early) and elections of deputies of legislative bodies of state power in 14 constituent entities of the Russian Federation. On September 13, 2015, elections of various levels were held, including elections of heads of constituent entities of the Russian Federation (10 regular elections, including elections through the parliaments of the constituent entities, and 14 early ones) and elections of deputies of legislative bodies of state power in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. However, this practice (voting on a Sunday in early September) shows that at this time of the year, many voters do not physically reach the polling stations, as many are still resting. Therefore, there was a need to adjust the single voting day. AT this moment this issue is being actively discussed in the legislative and executive authorities of the Russian Federation.

The most important function of the electoral process is that such a significant political and legal factor for the authorities, for any state as legitimacy, is determined primarily by the results of the will of citizens during voting during the election period. It is elections that are an accurate indicator of the ideological and political likes and dislikes of the electorate.

Thus, it seems justified to define the essence of the electoral system, firstly, as a set of rules, techniques and methods regulated by law political struggle for power, which regulate the functioning of the mechanism for the formation of public authorities and local self-government. Secondly, the electoral system is a political mechanism through which political parties, movements and other subjects of the political process carry out in practice their function of fighting for the conquest or retention of state power. Thirdly, the electoral process and mechanism is a way to ensure the degree of legitimacy of power necessary for the implementation of the state's power.

AT modern world There are two types of electoral systems - majoritarian and proportional. Each of these systems has its own varieties.

It takes its name from the French word majorite (majority), and the very name of this type of system to a large extent clarifies its essence - the winner and, accordingly, the owner of the corresponding elective post becomes the participant in the election campaign who received the majority of votes. The majority electoral system exists in three versions:

• 1) the majority system of relative majority, when the candidate who managed to get more votes than any of his rivals is recognized as the winner;
• 2) the majority system of an absolute majority, in which more than half of the votes cast in elections must be won in order to win (the minimum number in this case is 50% of the votes plus 1 vote);
• 3) the majority system of mixed or combined type, at which to win in the first round it is necessary to gain an absolute majority of votes, and if this result is not achieved by any of the candidates, then the second round is held, in which not all candidates go, but only those two who are in the first round took 1st and 11th places, and then in the second round, to win the elections, it is enough to get a relative majority of votes, that is, to get more votes than a competitor.

Under the majoritarian system, the votes cast are counted in single-mandate constituencies, each of which can only elect one candidate. The number of such single-mandate constituencies under the majoritarian system in parliamentary elections is equal to the constitutional number of deputy seats in parliament. During the elections of the President of the country, the whole country becomes such a single-mandate constituency.

The main advantages of the majority system include the following:

1. This is a universal system, since using it, you can elect both individual representatives (president, governor, mayor), and collective bodies of state power or local self-government (country parliament, city municipality).

2. Due to the fact that under the majority system, specific candidates are nominated and compete with each other. The voter can take into account not only his party affiliation (or lack thereof), political program, adherence to one or another ideological doctrine, but also take into account the personal qualities of the candidate: his professional suitability, reputation, compliance with the moral criteria and beliefs of the voter, etc.

3. In elections held according to the majoritarian system, representatives of small parties and even non-partisan independent candidates can really participate and win along with representatives of large political parties.

4. Representatives elected in single-member majoritarian districts receive a greater degree of independence from political parties and party leaders, since they receive a mandate directly from voters. This makes it possible to more correctly observe the principle of democracy, according to which the source of power should be voters, and not party structures. Under a majoritarian system, the elected representative becomes much closer to his constituents, as they know who exactly they are voting for.

Of course, the majority electoral system, like any other human invention, is not ideal. Its advantages are realized not automatically, but under “other things being equal” and to a very high degree of dependence on the “environment of application”, which is the political regime. For example, in a totalitarian political regime practically none of the advantages of this electoral system can be fully realized, since in this case it only performs the function of a mechanism for the realization of the will political power and not voters.

Among the objective shortcomings of the majority system, which, as it were, are inherent in it from the very beginning, the following are usually distinguished:.

First of all, under a majoritarian electoral system, the votes of those voters who were cast for non-winning candidates “disappear” and are not converted into power, despite the fact that in total amount of the votes cast in elections, it is these “non-winning” votes that can make up a very significant part, and sometimes not much less than the votes that determined the winner, or even exceed it.

Secondly, the majoritarian system is rightly considered more expensive, financially costly due to the possible second round of voting, and due to the fact that instead of election campaigns of several parties, several thousand election campaigns of individual candidates are being held.

Thirdly, with a majoritarian system, due to the possible victory of independent candidates, as well as candidates of small parties, a much greater likelihood of the formation of too dispersed, poorly structured and therefore poorly managed authorities is created, the effectiveness of which is significantly reduced because of this. This shortcoming is especially characteristic of countries with a poorly structured party system and large quantity parties (the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine is a prime example)

Finally, opponents of the majoritarian system argue that it creates an opportunity for the growth of the role of financial sponsors, contrary to the constitutional rights of voters. Very often, local governments are accused of using " administrative resource”, i.e. in the support of the administration of certain candidates, parties, etc. Presidential elections in 2004 Ukraine has confirmed this.

The second type The electoral system is a proportional system. The name itself is largely able to clarify its essence: deputy mandates are distributed in direct proportion to the number of votes cast for a particular political party. The proportional system has a number of significant differences from the majority system described above. Under a proportional system, the counting of votes of voters is carried out not within the framework of a single-member constituency, but in multi-member constituencies..

Under a proportional electoral system, the main subjects of the electoral process are not individual candidates, but political parties, whose lists of candidates compete with each other in the struggle for votes. With a proportional voting system, there is only one round of elections, a kind of “passability barrier” is introduced, which usually amounts to 4-5 percent of the number of votes cast nationwide.

Smaller and less organized parties are most often unable to overcome this barrier and therefore cannot count on deputy seats. At the same time, the votes cast for these parties (and, accordingly, the deputy mandates behind these votes) are redistributed in favor of those parties that have managed to score a passing score and can count on deputy mandates. The lion's share of these "redistributed" votes goes to those parties that managed to get the largest amount of votes.

That is why the so-called “mass” (they are also centralized and ideological parties) are primarily interested in the proportional voting system, which do not focus on attractiveness bright personalities, but on the mass support of its members and supporters, on the readiness of its electorate to vote not for personalized, but for ideological and political reasons.

Election according to party lists according to the proportional system usually requires much lower expenses, but “on the other hand” in this case, between the people’s representative (deputy) and the people (voters) themselves, a figure of a kind of political intermediary appears in the person of the party leader, with whose opinion the “listed” deputy is forced be considered to a much greater extent than an MP from a majoritarian constituency.

Mixed or majoritarian-proportional electoral system

There is also also mixed or majority-proportional system, which, however, is not a separate, independent type electoral system, but is characterized by a mechanical association, parallel action of the two main systems. The functioning of such an electoral system is caused, as a rule, by a political compromise between parties that are mainly interested in a majoritarian system, and those parties that prefer a purely proportional system. In this case, the constitutionally designated number of parliamentary mandates is divided in a certain proportion (most often 11) between the majoritarian and proportional systems.

With this ratio, the number of single-member constituencies in the country is equal to half of the mandates in parliament, and the remaining half of the mandates are played according to the proportional system in one multi-member constituency. Each voter at the same time votes for a specific candidate in his single-mandate constituency, and for the list of one of the political parties in the national constituency. Such a system is currently valid for elections, the State Duma of Russia and some parliaments of other countries. (Until 2005. mixed system acted for the elections of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine).