The proportional electoral system is one of the types of electoral systems used in many countries, including Russian Federation.

The proportional electoral system was first used in elections in Belgium in 1899.

Proportional electoral system

The territory of the state or representative body is declared unified. Political parties and/or political movements put forward lists of their candidates. The voter votes for one of these lists. distributed in proportion to the votes received by each party.

Many countries have a passing threshold expressed as a percentage of all votes. For example, in Russia the passing percentage in elections to the State Duma in the last elections was 7%, and in the elections in 2016 it will be 5%. A five percent barrier exists in almost all countries, but in some countries the percentage is lower. For example, in Sweden - 4%, in Argentina - 3%, in Denmark - 2%, and in Israel - 1%.

The proportional system can be used both in the elections of the entire parliament (for example, in Denmark, Luxembourg, Latvia, Portugal), and only the lower house (for example, in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Poland) or half of the lower house (for example, in Germany until 2007 and since 2016 in the Russian Federation).

Types of proportional electoral system

There are two main types of proportional electoral system - closed party lists and open party lists.

Closed party list - when a voter votes only for a party, and not for an individual candidate. The party receives the number of seats in proportion to the votes received. The mandates won in the elections are distributed within the party list among party members, according to their order in the list. If the list is divided into the central part and regional groups, candidates from the central part go first. Candidates from regional groups receive mandates in proportion to the votes cast for the party list in the corresponding region.

This type of proportional electoral system is used in the Russian Federation, in Israel, in the countries South Africa, during elections to the European Parliament, as well as in all countries of the European Union.

An open party list is when a voter votes not only for a party, but also for a specific party member from the list. Depending on the method, the voter can vote for either a specific party member, or for two, or indicate the order of preference for candidates on the list.

This type of proportional electoral system is used in Finland, the Netherlands, Brazil and Democratic Republic Congo.

Advantages of a proportional electoral system

1. The advantage of the proportional electoral system, in contrast to the one, is that votes are not lost. Except, of course, for those votes that were cast for parties that did not pass the percentage threshold. Therefore, elections in Israel are considered the fairest application of the proportional system.
2. The proportional electoral system allows for the creation of representation of political parties in accordance with their popularity among voters. However, this opportunity is not lost to the minority.
3. Voters do not vote for a specific candidate who has a better chance, but for a direction that they share.
4. In those countries where open lists are used, the influence of parties on the personal composition of their representatives in parliament is reduced.
5. Less likely the entry into parliament of representatives who have financial leverage over voters.

Disadvantages of the proportional electoral system

1. The main disadvantage of the proportional electoral system is considered to be the partial loss of the principle of democracy, the loss of communication between deputies and voters and/or specific regions.
2. In those countries where a closed party list is used, the voter votes for an abstract candidate. Most often, the voter knows only the leader of the party and a few of its prominent representatives.
3. With closed party lists, “locomotive technology” is also used - when at the beginning of the list there are popular personalities (for example, television and film stars), who then refuse mandates in favor of unknown party members.
4. Closed party lists enable the party leader to determine the order of candidates, which can lead to both dictatorship within the party and internal division due to unfair competition between party members.
5. The disadvantage is the high percentage barrier that does not allow a new and/or small batch to pass.
6. In a parliamentary republic, the government is formed by the party with the majority of mandates. But when proportional system there is a high probability that one of the parties will not have a majority, which leads to the need to create a coalition of ideological opponents. Such a government may be unable to implement reforms due to internal divisions.
7. An ordinary voter does not always understand the system of distribution of mandates, which means he may not trust the elections and refuse to participate in them. In many countries, the level of turnout for elections ranges from 40–60% of the total number of citizens eligible to participate in elections. This means that such elections do not reflect the true picture of preferences and/or the need for reform.

Proportional electoral system in Russia

In Russia, the proportional electoral system is used in elections to the State Duma and in elections to deputies of legislative (representative) bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

Starting from 2016, half of the deputies (225) of the State Duma of the Russian Federation will be elected in single-mandate majoritarian districts, and the second half - according to a proportional system with a percentage threshold of 5%. From 2007 to 2011, all 450 deputies were elected from a single electoral district using a proportional system with a percentage threshold of 7%.

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 expression of the will of citizens during voting during the election period. It is elections that are an accurate indicator of the ideological and political sympathies and antipathies 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 legislation political struggle for power, which regulate the functioning of the mechanism of organ formation state power and local government. Secondly, the electoral system is political mechanism, through which political parties, movements and other entities 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 powers.

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

Its name comes from the French word majorite (majority), and the very name of this type of system largely clarifies its essence: the winner and, accordingly, the owner of the corresponding elective post becomes the one of the participants in the election struggle who received the majority of votes. The majoritarian electoral system exists in three variants:

• 1) the majoritarian system of relative majority, when the winner is the candidate who managed to receive more votes than any of his rivals;
• 2) a majoritarian system of absolute majority, in which to win it is necessary to receive more than half of the votes cast in the election (the minimum number in this case is 50% of the votes plus 1 vote);
• 3) a majoritarian system of a mixed or combined type, in which to win in the first round it is necessary to obtain an absolute majority of votes, and if none of the candidates can achieve this result, then the second round is held, in which not all candidates, but only those two who took 1st and 11th places in the 1st round, and then in the 2nd round to win the election it is enough to receive a relative majority of votes, that is, to get more votes than a competitor.

The counting of votes cast under a majoritarian system is carried out in single-mandate electoral districts, from each of which only one candidate can be elected. The number of such single-mandate constituencies under a majoritarian system during parliamentary elections is equal to the constitutional number of deputy seats in parliament. During the election of the president of the country, the entire 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 government (country parliament, city municipality).

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

3. In elections held under a majoritarian system, representatives of small parties and even non-party independent candidates can actually participate and win, along with representatives of large political parties.

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

Of course, the majoritarian electoral system, like any other human invention, is not ideal. Its advantages are not realized automatically, but with “other equal conditions” and in a very high degree depending on the “environment of application,” which is the political regime. So, for example, under totalitarian conditions political regime practically none of the advantages of this electoral system can be fully realized, since in this case it only serves as a mechanism for implementing the will political power, not voters.

Among the objective shortcomings of the majoritarian system, which are inherent in it initially, the following are usually identified:.

Firstly, 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 the total amount of votes cast in the elections, it is these “non-winning” votes that can constitute a very significant part, and sometimes - not much less than the votes that determined the winner, or even exceeding 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 held.

Third, in a majoritarian system, due to the possible victory of independent candidates, as well as candidates of small parties, there is a much greater likelihood of the formation of too dispersed, poorly structured and therefore poorly managed government bodies, the effectiveness of which is significantly reduced because of this. This drawback is especially typical for countries with a poorly structured party system and a large number of parties (the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine is a prime example)

Finally, opponents of the majoritarian system argue that it creates favorable opportunities for the increasing role of financial sponsors, contrary to the constitutional rights of voters. Often local authorities authorities are accused of using " administrative resource", i.e. in the administration’s support of certain candidates, parties, etc. Presidential elections in 2004 in Ukraine confirmed this.

The second type The electoral system is a proportional system. The name itself can largely 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. In a proportional system, the counting of votes is carried out not within a single-member district, but in multi-member districts.

In 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 fight for votes. With a proportional voting system, only one round of elections is held, and 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 parliamentary 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 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 votes.

That is why the so-called “mass” (aka centralized and ideological parties), which do not focus on attractiveness, are primarily interested in the proportional voting system bright personalities, but on the massive 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 significantly lower expenses, but “on the other hand” in this case, between the people’s representative (deputy) and the people themselves (voters), a figure of a kind of political intermediary appears in the person of the party leader, with whose opinion the “list” deputy is forced be considered to a much greater extent than a deputy from a majoritarian district.

Mixed or majoritarian-proportional electoral system

There is also mixed or majority-proportional system, which, however, does not represent a separate, independent type of electoral system, but is characterized by a mechanical unification, the parallel operation of two main systems. The functioning of such an electoral system is usually caused 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 the mandates in parliament, and the remaining half of the mandates are played out according to the proportional system in one multi-member constituency. Each voter votes both for a specific candidate in his single-mandate electoral district and for the list of one of the political parties in the national electoral district. This system is currently in place for elections, State Duma Russia and some parliaments of other countries. (Until 2005, a mixed system operated for elections to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine).

“Politics” is one of the most common and polysemantic words in the Russian language, and in many other languages ​​of the world. In everyday life, politics is often called any purposeful activity, be it the activity of the head of a state, a party or a company, or even the relationship of a wife to her husband, subordinate to a specific goal.

In the history of political thought, including among modern theorists, legal concepts of politics are quite widely represented. They consider politics and the state to be derived from law and, above all, from natural human rights, which underlie public law, laws and state activities.

Politics is the most important sphere of life of society, the state and every citizen.

Teleological definitions of politics, as can be seen from Parsons's characterization, are widely used within the framework of systemic analysis of society. From a systemic point of view, politics is a relatively independent system, a complex social organism, an integrity delimited from environment- other areas of society - and in continuous interaction with it.

Politics is the organizational and regulatory-control sphere of society, guiding the life, activities, relationships of people, social groups, classes, nations, peoples and countries.

6. Electoral systems: majoritarian, proportional and mixed.

The electoral procedure is the state’s measures to organize and conduct elections, “the electoral law in action.”

The election results are determined by those casting ballots based on two main systems: proportional and majoritarian.

The proportional system involves voting on party lists and the distribution of mandates between parties strictly proportional to the number of votes cast. In this case, the so-called “electoral meter” is determined - the smallest number of votes required to elect a single deputy. The proportional system is the most common electoral system in the modern world. In Latin American countries, for example, elections are held only according to a proportional system. It is used in Belgium, Sweden and many other countries. The proportional system has two varieties:

a) proportional electoral system at the national level (voters vote for political parties throughout the country; electoral districts are not allocated);

b) proportional electoral system based on multi-member districts (deputy mandates are distributed based on the influence of parties in electoral districts).

The majoritarian system is characterized by the fact that the candidate (or list of candidates) who receives the majority of votes required by law is considered the winner. Most are different. There are electoral systems that require an absolute majority (50% plus 1 vote or more). Such a system exists, for example, in Australia. The majority system means that the one who gets more votes than each of his opponents wins the election. It is called the “first to finish system.” Currently, such a system is used in the USA, Canada, Great Britain, and New Zealand. Sometimes both varieties of the majority system are practiced. For example, in France, when electing members of parliament, the absolute majority system is used in the first round of voting, and the relative majority system in the second round. In general, under a majoritarian system, voting is possible in one, two or even three rounds.

Proportional and majoritarian systems have their advantages and disadvantages.

One of the advantages of the majoritarian system is that it contains the possibility of forming an effective and stable government. It allows large, well-organized parties to easily win elections and create one-party governments.

The main disadvantages of the majoritarian system:

1) a significant part of the country’s voters (sometimes up to 50%) remains unrepresented in government;

3) two parties that received an equal or close to an equal number of votes nominate a different number of candidates to government bodies (a situation cannot be ruled out in which a party that receives more votes than its rival does not receive a single mandate at all).

Thus, the majoritarian system promotes the formation of a majority in government and tolerates the disproportion between the votes received and the mandates received.

The advantages of the proportional system include the fact that the government bodies formed through it present a real picture of the political life of society and the alignment of political forces. It provides a feedback system between the state and civil society organizations, ultimately promoting the development of political pluralism and multi-party system.

The main disadvantages of the proportional system:

1) difficulties arise in forming a government (reasons: lack of a dominant party; creation of multi-party coalitions, including parties with different goals and objectives, and, as a consequence, instability of governments);

2) the direct connection between deputies and voters is very weak, since voting is carried out not for specific candidates, but for parties;

3) independence of deputies from their parties (such lack of freedom of parliamentarians can negatively affect the process of discussing and adopting important documents).

Electoral systems have come a long way in their development. During this process (in the post-war period), the formation of a mixed electoral system began, i.e. a system that should incorporate the positive characteristics of both majoritarian and proportional systems. Within the framework of a mixed system, a certain part of the mandates is distributed on a majority basis. The other part is distributed proportionally. Experience in improving electoral systems indicates that this system is more democratic and effective in achieving political stability.

electoral proportional political election

The main types of electoral systems are: majoritarian, proportional and mixed

The majoritarian electoral system is characterized by the fact that the candidate (or list of candidates) who receives the majority of votes stipulated by law is considered elected to a particular elected body. Depending on the majority required to win elections, majoritarian electoral systems are divided into relative majority and absolute majority systems. The majority system of relative majority is a system in which the candidate who received the largest number of votes is considered elected, i.e. more votes than any of his rivals. This is the simplest system. It is always successful because someone always gets a relative majority of votes. A huge advantage of this system is the elimination of the second round. With this system it is usually not installed mandatory minimum voter participation in voting. The absolute majority majority system requires an absolute majority of votes to be elected, i.e. more than half (50% + 1) of their total number. Under this system, a lower threshold for voter participation is usually set. If it is not achieved, then the elections are considered invalid.

The advantage of this system compared to the system of relative majority is that candidates supported by a real majority of voters voted are considered elected, even if this majority was one vote. If no candidate receives more than half of the votes, a second round of elections is held, in which, as a rule, the two candidates who received the most votes are presented. In the second round, the winner is usually determined by a relative majority system.

The proportional system involves the distribution of mandates in proportion to the votes received by parties or party blocs.

Like the majoritarian proportional system, it has varieties. There are two types of it:

• - voting on closed party lists. In this case, the voter votes for the party list as a whole, without changing the order of the candidates;
• - - voting with open party lists. In this case, the voter has the right to vote not only for the party list as a whole, but also to rearrange candidates on the list of his choice.

The majoritarian and proportional systems have their advantages and disadvantages.

One of the advantages of the majoritarian electoral system is that it contains the possibility of forming an effective and stable government. This is achieved by distributing mandates among large, well-organized parties, which form single-party governments based on a majority. This system also encourages smaller parties to form blocs or coalitions even before elections begin. Practice shows that the authorities created on this basis are stable and capable of pursuing strong public policy. In a majoritarian electoral system, the population votes for specific deputies. As a result, strong, sustainable ties arise between deputies and voters. Since deputies are directly elected by citizens of a certain district and usually count on their re-election, they are more focused on their electorate, trying, if possible, to fulfill their election promises or respond to current requests from voters. In turn, voters know their deputies better than when they were elected from a general party list under a proportional system. At the same time, the majoritarian electoral system also contains a number of significant shortcomings. This system largely distorts the real picture of preferences and thus does not reflect the will of voters. Under this system, for the distribution of parliamentary mandates, most often only the fact that a candidate receives a relative majority of votes matters. The votes given to all other candidates are not taken into account when distributing mandates and, in this sense, are lost. There is a fairly large opportunity to manipulate the will of voters through “cutting out electoral districts.” Knowing the preferences of voters, the geography of constituencies can be manipulated. For example, create purely rural and purely urban districts, or, conversely, mix them when it is beneficial for one candidate or another, etc. Thus, the majoritarian electoral system creates the possibility of forming a government that relies on a majority in parliament, but does not enjoy the support of the majority of the population. It severely limits access to parliament for minority representatives, including small parties. As a result, a majoritarian electoral system can weaken the legitimacy of the government, cause citizens to distrust the political system, and become passive in elections. The proportional electoral system largely eliminates the obvious discrepancy between the number of votes cast for a party and the number of parliamentary seats it receives. Thus, the proportional electoral system most adequately reflects the political will of the population. The advantages of the proportional electoral system include the fact that the government bodies formed with its help present a real picture of the balance of political forces. It creates the opportunity to be represented in government bodies by national, religious minorities and other social strata that form small parties. Thus, the proportional electoral system ensures feedback between the state and civil society organizations, contributes to the legitimization of power, and intensifies the participation of the population in elections. The disadvantages of the proportional electoral system include the relatively less stability of the government. The broad representation of various political forces in parliament, characteristic of this system, very often does not allow any party to form a one-party government and encourages the formation of coalitions. The unification of parties that are dissimilar in their goals can lead to an aggravation of contradictions between them, to the collapse of coalitions and the resignation of the government. Since, under a proportional electoral system, voting is carried out not for specific candidates, but for lists of parties and associations, the direct connection between deputies and voters is very weak. This circumstance also contributes to the greater dependence of deputies on their parties than on voters. Such lack of freedom can negatively affect the process of passing important laws; a deputy most often votes in the interests of the party and its leaders than his voters. In order to overcome the excessive party fragmentation of the parliament, which will limit the possibility of small parties or representatives of extremely radical and sometimes extremist forces entering it, many countries use so-called “electoral thresholds” that establish the minimum votes required to receive parliamentary mandates. IN different countries When using a proportional system, this “threshold” fluctuates. So in Israel it is 1%, in Denmark - 2%, in Ukraine - 3%, in Italy, Hungary - 4%, in Germany, Russia - 5%, in Georgia - 7%, in Turkey - 10%. Candidates of those parties or party blocs that have not overcome this “threshold” are automatically excluded from the list of candidates. A high “electoral threshold” sometimes results in a significant portion of voters being unrepresented in parliament. Minimal - essentially turns out to be ineffective. In a number of countries, in order to connect positive sides different systems and to minimize their shortcomings, mixed-type electoral systems are created. In which, in one way or another, elements of the majoritarian and proportional systems are combined. The practical implementation of a mixed electoral system in the voting process is that each voter receives two ballots. Accordingly, he has two votes: with one he votes for a specific candidate running in a given electoral district, with the other - for a political party or association.

Attempts to make maximum use of the advantages of basic electoral systems and neutralize their shortcomings lead to the emergence of mixed electoral systems. The essence of the mixed electoral system is that part of the deputies to the same representative body of power is elected according to the majoritarian system, and the other part - according to the proportional system. It is planned to create majoritarian electoral districts (most often single-member, less often multi-member) and electoral districts (with a proportional system with multi-member districts) or a single national multi-member electoral district for voting on party lists of candidates. Accordingly, the voter receives the right to simultaneously vote for a candidate (candidates) running in a majoritarian district on a personal basis and for a political party (list of candidates from a political party). In reality, when carrying out the voting procedure, a voter receives at least two ballots: one to vote for a specific candidate in a majoritarian district, the other to vote for a party.

Consequently, a mixed electoral system is a system for the formation of representative bodies of power, in which some of the deputies are elected on a personal basis in majoritarian districts, and the other part is elected on a party basis according to the proportional representation principle.

Mixed electoral systems are usually distinguished by the nature of the relationship between the elements of the majoritarian and proportional systems used in them. On this basis, two types of mixed systems are distinguished:

• * a mixed unrelated election system, in which the distribution of mandates under a majoritarian system does not depend in any way on the results of elections under a proportional system (the examples given above are just examples of a mixed unrelated electoral system);
• * mixed linked electoral system, in which the distribution of seats under the majoritarian system depends on the results of elections under the proportional system. In this case, candidates in majoritarian districts are nominated by political parties participating in elections according to the proportional system. Mandates received by parties in majoritarian districts are distributed depending on the election results using a proportional system. Thus, in Germany, in the elections to the Bundestag, the main vote is voting for state party lists. However, German voters also vote for candidates in majoritarian constituencies. A political party that receives more votes than the number stipulated by law receives the right to represent its candidates who won in majoritarian districts (“transitional mandates”).

Electoral systems

Exists two main electoral systems - majoritarian and proportional.

In turn, the majority system is divided into the following main types:

Majority system of relative majority. Under this system, the candidate who receives more votes than any of his opponents is considered elected.

Under such a system, elections are usually held in single-mandate constituencies, that is, one deputy is elected from the district. Counties are much less common multi-member when several deputies are elected from a district. An example would be the U.S. Presidential Electoral College election in a state or federal district, in which lists of electors compete.

As a rule, such a system does not establish a mandatory minimum voter participation in voting.

The advantage of this system is that elections are held in one round.

The main disadvantage of this system is that the deputy is elected by a relative majority of votes. The absolute majority can vote against it, but their votes are lost. In addition, deputies nominated from small parties, as a rule, lose elections and these parties lose representation. However, the winning party often provides an absolute majority in parliament and can form a stable government.

Majoritarian system of absolute majority. Under this system, a person must receive more than half the votes to be elected.

An absolute majority can be threefold:

a) from the number of registered voters;

Under such a system, a lower threshold for voter participation is usually set. If it is not achieved, the elections are declared invalid or not held.

Elections are usually held in single-member constituencies.

Disadvantages of this system:

a) the party that received the majority of votes in the country may not receive the most a large number of seats in parliament;

c) ineffective elections, especially with a large number of candidates. If none of the candidates receives the required number of votes in the first round, a second round (re-vote) is held, in which, as a rule, two candidates who received greatest number votes in the first round (re-running).

The main ways to overcome ineffectiveness are the following:

a) to be elected in the second round, it is enough to receive a relative majority of votes;

b) alternative voting. This system can be considered using the example of Australia. When voting, voters rank numbers according to preference (1, 2, 3, 4, etc.). If none of the candidates receives an absolute majority, then a redistribution of votes is carried out between the candidates, starting with the one who received the least number of the first two preferences indicated on his ballot, until one of the candidates receives the required number of votes.

Majority system of qualified majority. To be elected under this system, you must receive 2/3 of the votes. Sometimes the law may determine a different percentage of votes.

A unique variation of the majoritarian system is the cumulative vote and the system of a single non-transferable vote.

Cumulative vote- each voter in a multi-member electoral district has as many votes as there are candidates to be elected, or another number, statutory, but for all voters it is equal. A voter can give one vote to several candidates or give all votes to one candidate. This system is found in local government elections in some German states.

Single non-transferable vote system (semi-proportional)- in a multi-member electoral district, a voter votes for only one candidate from a particular party list. Candidates who have collected more votes than others are considered elected, i.e. When determining voting results, the principle of the majority system of relative majority applies.

System of proportional representation of political parties.

The essence of this system is that the number of deputy mandates received by a party is proportional to the number of votes cast for it. Parties nominate lists of candidates and voters vote not for specific candidates, but for a list of candidates from the party.

Lists of candidates can be linked or free. With a linked list, the voter does not have the right to make changes to the lists submitted by parties. With free lists, voters have this right.

The main advantage of the system is the guaranteed representation of even small parties that still have their own electorate.

The disadvantages of the proportional representation system include the following:

a) instability of parliament, where no party or their coalition can obtain a stable majority;

b) the voter may not know all the candidates from the supported party, that is, in fact, he votes for a specific party, and not for specific candidates;

c) the system can only be used in multi-member districts. How larger district, the greater the degree of proportionality can be achieved.

The main means of overcoming these shortcomings are the electoral quota and the divisor method.

Electoral quota (electoral meter) is the minimum number of votes required to elect one candidate.

Divisor method consists of sequentially dividing the number of votes received by each list of candidates by a certain series of divisors. Depending on which dividers are installed, large or small batches benefit. The smallest divisor represents the electoral quota. If an independent candidate is nominated, he must receive the established quota of votes.

Barrier point may limit the participation of parties in the distribution of deputy mandates on two grounds:

a) those parties that did not receive a single mandate in the first distribution are not allowed to participate in the second distribution of mandates, although they may have significant balances of votes;

b) most often, parties that do not receive a certain percentage of votes are excluded from the distribution of mandates.

This disadvantage is overcome in the following ways:

Linking lists of candidates (blocking)- bloc parties participate in elections with common lists of candidates, and after common list received a certain number of mandates, distribute these mandates among themselves.

Panching- the right of a voter to vote for candidates from different lists or add new candidates to these lists. Panache can be used in a majoritarian system with multi-member districts or in a proportional system. In a proportional system, panning can be combined with preferential voting.

Mixed (majority-proportional systems). In a mixed system, most often half of the deputies are elected according to the majoritarian system of relative majority, and the other half - according to proportional majority.