Week 5 Reading Notes

0.0(0)
Studied by 0 people
call kaiCall Kai
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/19

encourage image

There's no tags or description

Looks like no tags are added yet.

Last updated 12:25 AM on 4/13/26
Name
Mastery
Learn
Test
Matching
Spaced
Call with Kai

No analytics yet

Send a link to your students to track their progress

20 Terms

1
New cards

Electoral System

The rules that structure how votes are cast at elections for a represented assembly, and how these votes are converted into seats in said assembly.

2
New cards

Effects of Electoral Systems

  • Composition of a legislative assembly (ie. which parties are given how many seats.)

  • Has an impact on policy outcomes (ex. the tendency for SMP systems to overreward large parties and create majorities)

  • Nature of government (ex. coalition or single-party)

  • Voter behavior and parliamentarian behavior

  • Quality of government

3
New cards

Mixed Systems

Some MPs are elected by a plurality or majority formula (usually from SMDs) and others are elected by PR.

4
New cards

Closed List

In which the voter cannot express a choice for individual candidates on the list.

5
New cards

Preferential Lists

Voters are able to express a choice for individual candidates on a list.

6
New cards

Proportional Representation by Single Transferrable Vote

Voters are able to rank-order all candidates within each multi-member constituency.

7
New cards

1

District Magnitude in Single Member Constituencies

8
New cards

The number of seats in the entire legislative assembly.

District magnitude in countries where there is only one, national constituency. Ex. the Netherlands.

9
New cards

Categorical Systems

Type of ballot structure, termed by Douglas Rae. Channels each parcel of electoral strength into a grasp of a single party.

10
New cards

Ordinal Systems

Type of ballot structure, termed by Douglas Rae. May disperse each parcel of electoral strength among a number of competing parties. Includes rank-order systems, including alternative vote and PR-STV.

11
New cards

Panachage

A facility in PR systems where voters have a number of preference votes at their disposal and can distribute these among candidates on more than one party’s list.

12
New cards

Dividual Systems

Ballot structures where voters can divide votes among more than one party. Includes mixed systems where voters can cast a constituency vote for a member of one party, and a list vote for a different party. PR systems with the option of panachage also belong in this category.

13
New cards

1 Tier of Seats

Number of levels of seat allocation in a single-member constituency system (ex. Canada, France, the UK, the USA).

14
New cards

Disproportionality

The smaller the district magnitude, the greater the __________.

15
New cards

Compensatory Tier

Seats awarded at a higher tier in a multi-tier system of seat allocation are used to correct proportionality where parties are underrepresented at a lower level.

16
New cards

Parallel Tiers

In a multi-tier system, all tiers are equal and none can be seen as higher or lower.

17
New cards

Explicit Thresholds

An entry barrier in PR systems to prevent the smallest parties from qualifying for seat allocation. Ex. in Germany, only parties that win 5 per cent of list votes can qualify for list seats.

18
New cards

Why Limit Proportionality?

To prevent excessive fragmentation and make it easier to form governments. Of a particular concern in countries with weakly structured party systems (ex. post-Soviet nations).

19
New cards

Effective Thresholds

Entry barriers in non-PR systems that are built into the system, preventing parties below a certain size from winning seats. Determined by district magnitude, as well as seat allocation.

20
New cards

Malapportionment

Awarding some areas of the country more seats in relation to population than others — ex. the US Senate. Can be effected by a party in power for partisan/gerrymandering reasons. Exaggerates the political influence of rural areas with low population density, which leads to a disadvantage for parties on the left (typically).