Spain: looping in tactical voting

 

“At times voting is just like funerals” – El Roto

Unhappy nation votes for change in the hope its woes will end. A very familiar tale lately incarnated by debt-soaked countries where technocratic governments and opposition leaders have raised to power in the midst of asphyxiating pressure.

Unsurprisingly, Monday’s headlines made Spain the protagonist of this politically bewitching tale, following the conservative PP party’s overwhelming victory. Alfredo Pérez Rubalcaba was severely punished for Zapatero’s economic legacy giving Mariano Rajoy a parliamentary supermajority like no other candidate has ever won.

But there is more to this story.

D’Hondt’s betrayal 

There is nothing like a strong government with great parliamentary representation. It is in fact the best way to govern; new legislation and proposals are smoothly passed without much room for obstaculating debate. Mariano Rajoy’s landslide victory has given him an even wider supermajority than Aznar’s after the 2000 election. His voters can rest assured that many electora promises will consistently become tangible policies.

And so, you might get the impression that his voters are a supermajority themselves… but that is blatantly wrong: they are not.

In fact, if voters and parliamentary seats were proportionally equal, the PP would own 44% of the seats in parliament instead of 53%. The key to the supermajority cannot be found in their own merits, but in D’Hondt’s magical top hat.

- Here is a comparison between parliamentary representation and votes - 

D’Hondt’s method (explained below) is designed to provide simple majoritarianism, favouring large parties and coalitions over smaller parties. This method worked fairly well helping Spain to solidly take its first steps as a democracy during the late 70s.

The BBC’s Jeremy Vine explains D’Hondt’s Method in the eve of the European Elections

But in modern bipartisan Spain, D’Hondt’s Method is nothing but an obstacle to political plurality and ultimately progress as a whole. Voter turnout fell by 2.61% and while voters punished the socialists, who saw their worst result since 1977, many did not switched their vote to PP either, which even lost votes in strongholds like Madrid and only gained 500k new votes since the 2008 election. Or put it this way: while PSOE lost 15% of its voters, the PP only gained 4%.

The clear winner of the election may still be Mariano Rajoy, but with 10% of voters giving their support to smaller parties, the real change did not come with waving blue flags. Minor parties like centrist UPyD or left-wing IU have almost tripled and doubled their support respectively, while newborn parties led by Basque-separatist Amaiur have also gained considerable support.

And yet none of this matters to D’Hondt and his two biggest fans: PP and PSOE. Or should I say PPSOE?

PP, PSOE and PPSOE

Bipartisan democracies come with two big drawbacks: a monopoly of power and power to monopolise their perpetuity. This was one of the driving reasons for the Spanish ‘indignados’ protests back in March, the impotence of smaller parties in a system designed to overbenefit the big two.

Voters not only lack a say in determining the party candidates, but these remain unknown until the election is over. As a consequence, neither party elects the most capable rulers; rather, it chooses to favour old dogs in the thirst for power and with no responsibility to society or knowledge to assist them. The system chooses to reward those in the line of ‘party succession’ instead of the most prepared to take on the challenge. Which is why some of Zapatero’s ministers lacked tertiary education and previous professional life.

Their political discourse has abandoned ideas, policies and convictions to become a message predicating an eerie apocalyptical future without them in government.

This has turned PP and PSOE into what so many have labelled PPSOE. Two parties concerned with appealing to the indecisive masses with cheap populism, demagogy and above all their binomial squabbles. I know. This is common to most bipartisan democracies. But Spaniards consider its ruling class the third biggest problem of the nation.

So why are their ballots in everyone’s hands? I hear you ask. Keep reading.

A ghost called Tactical Voting

“Why would I give my vote to a loser?”

Horse racing or football betting have probably more in common with Spanish elections than informed votes; there are many factors to blame for this,

First, political campaigning is at Orwellian levels in Spain. Every four years streets and billboards are decorated with rejuvenated images of the candidates, PA system-equipped cars flock to main cities carrying loud slogans, local politicians take the streets armed with flyers and the media begins its ritual bicephalous coverage. This is particularly alarming on RTVE (Spain’s national broadcaster), where free campaign segments are awarded to each party in complete disproportion. For example, PP and PSOE were assigned 45 minutes on air while other parties were left with 15 or 10.

Second, “Better the evil you know than the goodness you don’t”. Spaniards may be eager for change, but change is not allowed to trespass the boundaries of the politically known. Factions beyond PP and PSOE are repetitively  labelled too conservative/fascist and too leftist/radical. Jeopardies to a welfare state that is ironically failing to protect its own citizens.

Thirdly, d’Hondt’s intimidating shadow. Defying d’Hondt takes courage. It’s acknowledging a second class citizenship where your political support represents a fraction of any PPSOE voter. True disbelievers of d’Hondt will accept this, but most citizens would rather see their votes having a tangible effect.

What goes next

Well, we took the squares. Twice before elections. It even became a global movement. And that highlighted much of the above.

Some people voted accordingly, some didn’t vote… accordingly too. These demands should not call for the creation of new parties, they should call to boicot existing ones. Campaigns like #nolesvotes (‘don’t vote them‘) should gain further presence in the media using a combination of PR and advertising campaigns. It would be too optimistic to expect immediate reforms, but this is our best chance to lay the foundation stones of a new and strengthen relationship between us and our rulers.

We must inform and make Spaniards aware of the imperfections that weaken our system. It is not about sided ideals, they are simply about invigorating democracy, giving equal voice to all citizens and stopping supermajorities that jeopardise rights and rule authoritatively.

For a more detailed account on d’Hondt’s effect in the 2011 General Elections you can read citizen journalist Pau Llop Franch’s report (in Spanish).