Special TA Office Hours (April 5th-7th) Jason HildebrandtJason Hildebrandt

Monday 1:00-2:00Monday 1:00-2:00 Wednesday 1:00-2:00Wednesday 1:00-2:00

Laszlo SarkanyLaszlo Sarkany Monday 10:00-12:00Monday 10:00-12:00 Monday 1:00-3:00Monday 1:00-3:00

Nadir BudhwaniNadir Budhwani TBATBA

Esmorie MillerEsmorie Miller Tuesday 11:00-12:00Tuesday 11:00-12:00 Wednesday 11:00-12:00Wednesday 11:00-12:00

Matt O’RourkeMatt O’Rourke Tuesday 10:00-11:00Tuesday 10:00-11:00 Tuesday 1:00-2:00Tuesday 1:00-2:00

Korhan YazganKorhan Yazgan Monday 1:00-2:00Monday 1:00-2:00 Wednesday 1:00-2:00Wednesday 1:00-2:00

Nikki PetruniakNikki Petruniak Tuesday, 10:00-11:00Tuesday, 10:00-11:00 Tuesday 1:00-2:00Tuesday 1:00-2:00

Herb ShieldsHerb Shields Tuesday 1:00-3:00Tuesday 1:00-3:00 Wednesday 1:00-3:00Wednesday 1:00-3:00

Electoral Systems Electoral Systems (Cont’d)(Cont’d)Ensuring Representation, Ensuring StabilityEnsuring Representation, Ensuring Stability

March 30March 30thth, 2004, 2004

Alternative Systems: Proportional Representation

representation (# of seats) directly proportional to share of popular vote received (# of votes)

Hypothetical Results Under Different Electoral Systems - 2000 Election

% Vote Seats: SMPS

Seats: PR

Liberal

CA

BQ

NDP

PC

Hypothetical Results Under Different Electoral Systems - 2000 Election

% Vote Seats: SMPS

Seats: PR

Liberal 40.8% 172 (57%)

CA 25.5% 66 (22%)

BQ 10.7% 38 (12.6%)

NDP 8.5% 13 (4.3%)

PC 12.2% 12 (4%)

Hypothetical Results Under Different Electoral Systems - 2000 Election

% Vote Seats: SMPS

Seats: PR

Liberal 40.8% 172 (57%) 127

CA 25.5% 66 (22%) 77

BQ 10.7% 38 (12.6%) 30

NDP 8.5% 13 (4.3%) 27

PC 12.2% 12 (4%) 37

Liberal Canadian Alliance

Progressive Conservative

Bloc Quebecois

New Democrats

2000 PR 2000 PR 2000 PR 2000 PR 2000 PR

Atlantic

19 13 0 3 9 11 0 0 4 5

QB 36 34 0 5 1 4 38 30 0 1

ON 100 53 2 25 0 15 0 0 1 9

MB/SK

7 8 14 11 1 3 0 0 6 7

AB/BC

7 16 50 33 1 5 0 0 2 5

CDA

172 127 66 77 12 37 38 30 13 27

Electoral Systems & Democracy

SMPS exaggerates political dominance of largest group of voters to

emphasize leadership, stability and accountability• do all models of democracy value bold leadership equally??

creates false majority rule concern with rights of minorities? concern with representation?

proportional representation more competition and choice

better representation of various interests more effective and meaningful political participation

higher level of consensus required for government to act

Political PartiesInterest Aggregation

Interest Representation

March 30th, 2004

Political Parties vs. Interest Groups interest groups strive to influence

political outcomes political parties strive to become

the governing party both represent political interests

political parties also aggregate interests

in doing so, political parties act to filter interests

Type of Political Parties

basis of organization electoral-professional parties vs.

mass parties basis of electoral competition

pragmatic parties (brokerage parties)

ideological-programmatic parties interest parties

http://www.guinnessvote.ca/register.html

Ideological/Programmatic Parties organized around social cleavages

class religion ethnicity region

traditional conceptions of ideology left vs. right

The Ideological SpectrumThe Ideological Spectrum

The Left -- The Left -- SocialistSocialist

The Right -- The Right -- ConservativeConservative

•government regulation of government regulation of the economythe economy

•policies to help policies to help disadvantaged groupsdisadvantaged groups

•policies to redistribute policies to redistribute incomeincome

•greater reliance on the greater reliance on the marketmarket

•fewer government fewer government regulationsregulations

•no special treatment for no special treatment for special interest groupsspecial interest groups

•lower taxeslower taxes

More Gov’tMore Gov’t Less Gov’tLess Gov’t

General Trends -- Political Parties the rise of pragmatism

increasingly parties try to compete for the middle ground

differences between parties fading

The Ideological Spectrum The Ideological Spectrum The Rise of PragmatismThe Rise of Pragmatism

The Left -- The Left -- SocialistSocialist

The Right -- The Right -- ConservativeConservative

Tony Blair (Britain) New Labour

Bill Clinton (US) New Democrats

George W. Bush (US) Compassionate Conservatism

General Trends -- Political Parties single member plurality systems

encourage pragmatic parties; PR promotes ideological/interest parties

the rise of pragmatism parties increasingly competing to occupy

the centre of the political spectrum reasons?

success of pragmatic parties has been self-reinforcing

the fall of communism affluence of western industrialized

societies

Political Parties & Democracy mass parties vs. electoral-

professional parties mass parties encourage greater

participation in politics by the public

majoritarian democrats electoral-professional parties

parties perform minimalist function of structuring elections

elite democrats

Political Parties & Democracy ideological/interest parties vs. pragmatic

parties ideological/interest parties

gives clear electoral choices• help make elections meaningful• encourages greater mass participation

majoritarian democrats pragmatic parties

depend on party elites (to broker deals among various interests)

elections• differences between parties are limited• electoral choice is really about best

management team elite democrats

Political Parties & Democracy liberal democrats

crucial point is that individuals remain free to form political parties (and contest elections) free from state interference

Interest GroupsInterest Representation

Interest Groups

organizations whose members act together to influence gov’t policy on specific issues, without contesting elections (different from parties!) how do they influence -- lobbying

play an important role in representing citizen demands to gov’t

Determinants of Interest Group Influence: size (membership) and cohesion information, expertise leadership, level of organization financial resources high-status (celebrity) membership values, goals, tactics, issue -- compatible with

broader public opinion? ability to sway public opinion

Determinants of Influence -- Institutionalization• institutionalization -- degree to which a group has

become an acknowledged actor in/part of the political process

• levels of institutionalization• institutional/associational/anomic

• danger for group -- co-optation• to become institutionalized, interest groups

must adopt norms and behaviours inside the broader governing consensus

• must be more concerned with preserving priveleged position in the long-term than winning on certain issues

• danger for government – capture• government relies on group to the point that it

loses it ability to act autonomously in that issue area

What Interest Groups Do -- Lobbying tactics

quiet consultations lobbying elected officials lobbying bureaucratic officials

mobilizing public opinion media campaigns public demonstrations

the paradox of interest group influence the most powerful interest groups are

often the most quiet!

Interest Groups and Democracy majoritarian democratic critique of

interest group pluralism interest group politics is grossly uneven

well-financed, privileged interests hold the advantage

the paradox of interest group influence the strongest interest groups (e.g.

economic interests) do not have to lobby in order to have influence

interest group influence displaces the influence of the general public

special interest groups

Interest Groups and Democracy elite democracy

interest group competition and lobbying (even if grossly uneven) is fine so long as...

political elites retain the power to make overall decisions in the general welfare

• the summation of all interest group demands does not equal the general welfare

Interest Groups and Democracy liberal democracy

pluralism as long as individuals are free to

form interest groups, interest group competition represents interests in society

groups do not have to be equal; groups have to have equal opportunity to compete