Sunday will be the elections for the German Bundestag. Germany has a very complicated two-way voting system – first vote for a direct candidate, second vote for the parties, which need five percent to enter. Second vote is the important one, but three direct votes also get a party to the Bundestag. Main parties: SPD – Social-democratic Party of Germany, governing party of Chancellor Gerhard Schröder; aim: being re-elected, becoming best party. Political tendency: social democrats. CDU/CSU – Christian Democratic (CSU in Bavaria: Social) Union, main opposition of Chancellor candidate Edmund Stoiber; aim: being elected, becoming best party. Political tendency: conservatives. FDP – Free Democratic Party, Chancellor candidate without chance Guido Westerwelle; aim: officially 18%, realistically 10% and get a position in which they replace The Greens as coalition partner of the governing party. Political tendency: liberals. DIE GRÜNEN - The Greens, coalition partner of SPD, no chancellor candidate, main figure is Secretary of State Joschka Fischer; aims: staying coalition partner of SPD, getting 8%. Political tendency: alternatives (ecology, no wars, no power plants…) PDS – Party of Democratic Socialism, former GDR-governing SED; entering the Bundestag (it’s almost merely an eastern party, also chance to enter via three direct (first) votes). Political tendency: (at least partially) post communists. All other parties are without chances to enter the Bundestag. Situation: After 16 years under Chancellor Kohl (CDU) a change was wanted and needed. Mainly because Kohl again wanted to be re-elected, SPD won and Schröder became chancellor in 1998. Realistically seen he failed in almost all of his aims, mainly to have 3.5 M unemployed people maximum (today I think it’s about 4.1 M; also before 9/11 and its world wide effects he failed with this aim). Six weeks ago the signs were clear: CDU and FDP would make the race. Then the flood catastrophe happened, and for some odd reason I’ll never understand, catastrophes are giving votes for the governing party. When also TV battles according to American format were held between Schröder and Stoiber, the situation finally shifted. Stoiber, currently Minister President of Bavaria, is seen as the more competent of the two, but he’s having problems with articulating properly and rather seems to be dry and stiff – many dislike him because of that. Though Stoiber did better than expected, Schröder now seems to be ahead. Clear is: if we could vote for the person of the chancellor, it would be Schröder; if we had to vote for the content of the politics, it would be Stoiber. US relation: Bush hates Schröder, that’s an open secret. Recently the government of Schröder annoyed the foreign public by being the only Europeans even excluding a war against Iraq if the UN allowed it. That’s nothing but election tactics as The Greens are a peace party and every time Germany is involved in a war (which ironically so far only happened when this ‘peace party’ was governing), the coalition shakes – this topic before an election and The Greens wouldn’t enter the Bundestag (though I’m very certain that in two months Germany will join the EU position anyway). Yesterday SPD’s Attorney General Herta Däubler-Gmelin cared for a fresh scandal by being quoted “Bush’s politics to use a war to get the eyes of the public away from inner problems is very famous since Hitler”. She claims to never have said this sentence, but people of this meeting confessed this journalist, though Däubler-Gmelin later in this meeting announced to not want to compare Bush with Hitler. Reactions were sharp criticism of Ari Fleisher and a threat to remove the US-army from Germany if Schröder is re-elected. Opposition claims to fire Däubler-Gmelin, which would be the ninth minister/secretary in fifteen of such jobs to not survive the four years election term. Bush obviously prefers a conservative solution with Stoiber. Outlook: The race is completely open. In last week’s last allowed prognostications SPD was the better party for the first time (40%), CDU followed with 39, FDP 8, Greens 7, PDS 4. A lot seems to depend on PDS; if they enter – via 5% or three direct first vote candidates – no traditional coalition could come to exist. Situation in this case: CDU and FDP would rather drink poison than collide with PDS, also Chancellor Schröder excluded governing with the ex-communists (though caution needed, SPD governs two or three states with PDS). The poison drinking is also preferred by CDU and FDP before governing with The Greens. So, SPD/Greeens, SPD/FDP, CDU/FDP are realistically the only options – problem: if PDS enters, probably none of these three versions can be realised; consequence would most likely be a big coalition of CDU/SPD, though this is something nobody really wants. Other option would be that Schröder re-thinks his PDS position and at least is tolerated by them, but this would cause riots in the west where PDS isn’t nearly accepted. In a big coalition Stoiber announced to not become chancellor, Schröder certainly would love to stay in office. But this certainly would depend on the most successful party, CDU would demand to have the chancellor position if they get most votes; in this case we could see somebody third as chancellor who we don’t think of yet (maybe first female chancellor: Angela Merkel, or first wheelchair person as chancellor: Wolfgang Schäuble).
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/19/opinion/19SAFI.html http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002291 Personally I don't care who wins. I think that Stoiber is a populist who isn't interested in the major changes that Germany needs. But I also think that Schroeder is a weasel for his decision to boost his popularity by running against the US. I might be able to respect that position if I thought it was genuine, but I have little reason to think it is anything more than saying whatever is necessary to get elected.
Re-read what I said. I am not criticizing the German people, they can think whatever they want. I am criticizing Schroeder for his about face after fully supporting the US and even sending troops to Afghanistan. It doesn't seem as though he genuinely believes what he is saying, he is just saying whatever is necessary to get elected.
Re: Re: Elections in Germany Hopefully the right ones and not the party of your club president . I also voted btw.
Its nice to know that we Americans are not the only people who have elections which turn downright silly and embarassing. This one reminds me of the Clinton-Dole race in 1996. The media darling versus the boring older guy. The debates were presented in a pretty silly format and touted as a "TV-Duell", not a debate. It gave the impression that the media was not taking the concept seriously. It looked like a series of early 1980s US debates with each candidate spouting the same sound bites and not getting into the specifics. While the US 2000 election ended up being a mess, the debates were a different matter. A few featured specific surprise questions from average Americans which forced the candidates to articulate how their policy proposals would affect that person's situation. It forced the candidates to be ready to talk the details of their plans and let the people decide based on this additonal information. I was hoping to see this in the German "duels" but it was not present. I find it a shame that the SPD found it necessary to make Iraq and Bush his main issues in the last weeks of the campaign. Comments from Schroeder, Stiegler, and now the justice minister are way over the top. Schroeder has successfully managed to move the issue of the German economy off the front page. I don't think many in the US fault Germany's position but they do take issue with how it is being communcated and utilized. While this shrewd political move will probably win his coalition the election, relations with the US not to mention the UK and France) have been severely damaged. I would not be surprised if it causes this group to withdraw its support from Germany becoming a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Chirac already refused Schroeder's request for help on the Mobilcom issue due to the way his criticism of France's position or Iraq. Perhaps the most ironic event this week was that what the justice minister accused Bush of doing (trying to draw attention away from a lagging economy), is exactly what the Red-Green coalition has done with the Iraq issue. With unemployment hovering around 10% and venture capital leaving the country at an increasing rate, its a shame this issue has been pushed into the background. I wish Germany well but it looks like the economy may get even worse for a few years before things turn up again. The sheer volume of young German entrepeneurs and money flowing into eastern Europe is amazing. While I've heard some call it German economic imperialism, I could not disagree more. It is simply people making rational decisions to invest where there are fewer barriers to entry and lower operating costs. Too bad neither of the major parties is offering up a plan to make the necessary changes to bring Germany back to the fore economically. Oh well, the great thing about democracy is that while the people do not always get the best government, they do get the government they deserve.
Excellent analysis. The Mobilcom support is a bad election joke as well (400 K government help for a bankrupt phone company to save some thousand jobs). Opposition - with good right - asks where they are when the thousands of smaller companies go bankruptcy. Instead of creating better market structures for the economy, the government prefers to occasionsally help out bigger firms as they get good media focus with it. The 400 K are nothing but election campaign, as a) it is very probable that EU will disallow it because it is illegal subvention, b) if EU allows it, the problems for Mobilcom are still the same and they most likely will end like Holzmann, where the government also did public help and the firm went bankruptcy two years later, and c) it is an election campaign paid by the public household and not by the party, which is the real shame about it. However, the opposition isn't really able to constantly point out the numerous mistakes of the present government. And nobody really knows what to expect of Stoiber - basically he's doing an extraordinary job as Minister President of Bavaria, which is one of four states (total are 16) in Germany making profit with the budget. For this nationwide election he decided to soften his positions from usually middle-right politics to the middle and that way he became a Schröder-copy with little differences. Only at the end of the election campaign when they realised that SPD is doing better and better in the prognostications, they started to get out some of their basical positions. Maybe too late... Yesterday I saw final prognostications of the Allenbach Institute saying: SPD 37.5 CDU 37 FDP 9 GRÜNE 7.5 PDS 4 All others together 5 If PDS doesn't get three direct candidates, then this would be a very, very small victory for the opposition.
With their stance on GW and the Iraq issue, I can see the problems it will create with US relations. What has been done/said that will stress their relations with the British and French?
Well, to be succinct, Schroeder called Tony Blair a lapdog and said Chirac was exercising poor judgement on Iraq. His SPD party also made a number of unkind remarks on the two.
Election over. Prognosis after 20.000 voters were asked: SPD 37.0 CDU 39.0 GRÜNE 9.5 FDP 7.0 PDS 4.3 OTHERS 3.2 The election districts will be counted now, results will be refreshed over the next hours. PDS has two direct candidates very probable, but also very probable that they won't get a third direct candidate, which means that only these two enter the Bundestag. With this result SPD/Grüne would have 301 of the 600 seats in the Bundestag and Schröder would remain chancellor. And caution: due to the very complicated voting system it can be that parties will be compensated for their direct candidates, so that more than 600 seats will be available. Result: nothing's certain yet. ------- At the same time there are state election in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and despite they are economically one of the worst going states, they probably re-elected SPD/PDS coalition.
Race is extremely close. Until five minutes ago SPD/GREENS had their 301 mandates, now in the latest result CDU/FDP is getting 301. At the moment: SPD 37.1 CDU 39.6 GRÜNE 9.2 FDP 7.2 PDS 4.1 OTHERS 2.8 Clear is: winners of this election are Edmund Stoiber with his CDU/CSU and also the GREENS (heck, why does every tenth vote for this chaos troup that has no political content?). Losers are Chancellor Schröder with his SPD though he might stay in office, that's entirely open, FDP for not being third strongest party and naturally PDS.
Two hours and fifteen minutes after the election closed, the current result looks like this: SPD 38.1 CDU 38.8 GREENS 8.6 FDP 7.3 PDS 4.0 This would again make 301 seats for the current government. Final result and also the future chancellor won't be known today.
Looks like Schröder stays chancellor. At the moment it looks like this: CDU 39.1 SPD 38.2 GREENS 8.5 FDP 7.4 All other parties can be neglected. Including the direct candidates it would be 303 seats for SPD/GREENS in a 605 seat parliament.
End Result: SPD 38.5 CDU 38.5 GREENS 8.4 FDP 7.2 PDS 4.0 Schröder remains chancellor with SPD/GREENS coalition. Seats: SPD/Greens 306 CDU/FDP 295 PDS 2 302 is majority We got to face that the problems of the nation won't be solved. A major challenge will be in some months when Bush makes pressure for an Iraq war - I'm quite sure that after the election excitement Schröder will change his mind about the war and then the Greens might struggle in internal fights as they did in the Kosovo and Afghanistan matter.
olafgb A few questions (US media is only reporting results, and I would like a little more analysis. And while my wife's family is from Germany, they are not too interested in German politics)) Did the PDS run direct candidiates only in the East? And what was their share in the former DDR? Did the justice minister loose her direct seat (I read that she had)? I hear she is being forced out of the cabinet, will she be given a proportional seat as a compensation? Where were the big vote swings? What part of the country did the CDU-CSU gain votes and the SPD loose them. Were the Green votes coming from angry SPD or FDP voters, or from PDS voters realizing the PDS was dead? Did any FDP direct candidiates get elected? What happened to the FDP's goal of 18%? How long are people giving the coalition to last? Will the Greens play ball for 4 more years, or will the purist wing finally revolt?
They named candidates everywhere, but in the west PDS just got 1.1%. It's a mere eastern party that'll probably collapse in some years when the old GDR thinking is gone. The two direct candidates that entered the Bundestag were elected in former East-Berlin btw. In former GDR PDS still makes between 20 and 35% Schröder announced to not give her a minister job again. She also lost her direct candidate race in her home town, but she'll be high enough in the SPD list to get a seat in the parliament. Best country for CSU was Bavaria where Stoiber got more than 56%, other strong areas for them are the south in general. The more you're heading to the north, the more SPD votes you'll find. SPD lost votes in every part of the society. Surely not from FDP, this is a difference from day to night. Greens gained votes from SPD and PDS for sure. Also see that many Germans don't want a war in Iraq and the Greens are an anti-war party (though, as I mentioned above - whenever Germany was involved in military actions, the Greens were governing) I don't think so. Usually only SPD and CDU/CSU get direct candidates elected. Exception are the two PDS candidates and one Green candidate, also in Berlin. The Greens will be stronger as they were the ones deciding the election. I'm not quite sure how long it'll last. The economy is everything but amazed with this result (DAX sank to a new five year record low this morning), there'll probably be no improvement in the unemployment records and the Iraq matter will be first crucial point. So far Schröder mastered all critical phases with his strong will to govern and it might be that he'll succeed also in the whole four year period. Important is that CDU is having the majority in 'Bundesrat' (analogue to US Senat), so without CDU agreement no new laws will come to exist (though, in the past Schröder tended to buy votes of the states by promising to finance some investements, e.g. Berlin's Olympiastadion)
olafgb Thanks for the information. Two other questions: 1. The Bundesrat -- I recall that the voting there was a little different than in the US Senate. The votes for each state are proportional to the population, AND the votes are cast as a block. Is this true? Also, the individual Bundesrat members tend to be state government people, such as the governor and others choosen by the state assemblies, so the members are not like US Senators in that sense. 2. The proportional vote -- i have always been a little unclear how this works. When you enter the booth you have 2 votes. The first is for a party and the second for the local candidate. That I understand. I also know you need 3 seats or 5% of the party vote to get proportional seats. But, are the proportional seats handed out on a parties percentage of total votes or just proportional votes counted. For example: CDU/CSU -- 38.5% SPD -- 38.5% B90/G -- 8.6% FDP -- 7.4% PDS -- 3% Others -- 2% The CDU/CSU, SPD, B90/G, and FDP all are entitled to proportinal seats. Do you throw out the votes of the PDS and others in determing the total number of seats each party is entitled to? Or does it work some other way.
You're right. Bundesrat are the single state governments and not like senators sent to this instution only. We'll have a Constitutional Court judgement soon to decide on the block votes. Constitution clearly demands it that way, but SPD abused their power of their chairman who counted a splitted vote to pull through one of their laws. Would be a giant surprise if this passes the Constitutional Court. Quite correct, just the first vote is for a direct candidate and the second for the party. Yes, basically there are 600 seats in the Bundestag and they depend on the second votes (shared by the parties entering, the ones not making it don't count). Every further seat comes in over the first votes, i.e. like PDS this time less than three direct votes and also if in one state a party would have more seats over first votes than with the second votes.
This German election details the flaws of a Parliamentarian system. A fringe party like the wacko Greens actually have a voice since plurality votes require coalition governments. Just think, if we had that system here Al Gore & Ralph Nader would've formed our coalition government. It certainly would've collapsed by now with Nader nipping at Gore's heels and pulling him leftward. Nader would drop out of the coalition and a special election would have to be called. All this in the midst of preparing for war. The system stability created by our Founding Fathers was brilliant, despite what Berkeley teaches its students.
Yet the British system is also parlimentary and allowed the British to fight World War Two with a coalition government. Granted, the difference is that Germany has proportional representation and Britian does not, but there is nothing wrong with a parliamentary system, per se. As for proportional repsresentation, it can work, especially when done the way the Germans have, with a high threshold to get into parliament. Israel for example has no threshold. You win 1/120th of the vote you get a seat. In German, the "3 or 5 rule" tends to discourage real fringe parties, like the communists or the neo-Nazis. As for the greens, they are a fringe party, but 8% of the voters agree with them. But they are in government, so they seem not to be the old "anti-everything" Greens, but rather,m at least some of them joined the establishment (that's the worst thing you can say to a green, right?) Assuming the Greens the now part of the Bunds-establishment, that means the specifically anti-republican parties (PDS and neo-Nazis) only received about 6.8% of the vote. Even including the Greens (8.6) in that group, the anti-republican parties received 15.4% of the vote. Compare that to the almost 40% the anti-republicans received in the first round of the French presidential election.
Clear is: winners of this election are Edmund Stoiber with his CDU/CSU I realize this may have been written in the heat of the moment and in the ink of disappointment, so to speak, but surely you can't be serious ? The CDU/CSU failed to achieve every single one of their publicly declared election aims: - They did not oust Schröder from office - They are unable to form a government of their own with the FDP - They did not become the largest party, meaning that even if there had been the slightest chance of a grand coalition, it would not have been under a CDU/CSU chancellor Furthermore, Edmund Stoiber has achieved the third worst election result for the Union in history and the only positive thing about this election for them is that it wasn't quite as catastrophic as it was in '98. Remember: All of this at a time, when the present government were doing all they could to help the CDU/CSU back into power. So Stoiber is a winner ? Do you really believe that the CDU/CSU have the slightest reason to be satisfied with this result ? I don't. If I was in charge of CDU strategy, I would be *very* worried that this election has confirmed the dwindling percentage of the electorate that are prepared to vote for the CDU, because permanent results the wrong side of 40% destroy the legendary "structural majority" and prevent any reasonable chance of gaining power, as long as the FDP are the only party the CDU can form coalitions with. In '98 the SPD got a lot of votes from the political center, people who traditionally might have been Union voters, but who - like most of the country - had had more than enough of the stagnation and corruption of the late Kohl era. It is simply natural that the Union would manage to win back some of these, especially given the patchy record of the current incumbents on economic matters and general political scandals. However, at the end of the day Stoiber failed to convince sufficient contingents of the nation (especially in the East) that he is in possession of any special mojo that would enable him to break the deadlock any more than Schröder could. Germans are politically an extremely conservative bunch, they don't vote chancellors out of office unless they are really sure that a change is worth risking the sacred security blanket of stability. It is way too easy to say that it was The Flood and/or Iraq that were solely responsible for Schröder's amazing comeback, at the end of the day many people also realized that the Union was short of feasible programmatical alternatives and, crucially, short of qualified personnel. Most of Stoiber's "competence team" are the usual suspects from Kohl's final days and a *lot* of voters didn't want to go back there all over again. the GREENS (heck, why does every tenth vote for this chaos troup that has no political content?). Again, how you can say this is a complete mystery to me. If there is anything the Greens *do* have, it is political content and conviction, much more so than any of the more established parties that are all too ready to jump on any bandwagon that happens to pass down their street, something voters are more sensitive about than most politicians realize. They also have the country's most popular politician, who does a universally acclaimed Good Job (may I remind you of the unbearable Klaus Kinkel, his predecessor), and they are not warmongers. Their focus is on environmental issues, not so much on economics, so fair enough, if that's what turns you on they won't be so attractive to you. But to call them a "chaos troupe" in 2002 is as blind as it is reactionary and frankly says a lot more about you than it does about them. The days of lilac tie-died dungarees and sandals are (thankfully) gone now, the vast majority of the Greens are as established as can be, albeit in their own special way. Last not least they can be relied upon not to embarrass the nation by fishing for votes in extremist circles, which is a lot more than can be said for their counterparts in other, more traditional parties (Hello Mr.Möllemann, Good Evening Mr.Beckstein). Where is the problem ? Losers are Chancellor Schröder with his SPD Erm...yes...sure. The SPD is the strongest party (for only the third time since the war), have a decent, workable majority and they remain in power, all despite being so far behind in the polls throughout most of this year that almost everyone had given up on them. Man, they sure got ripped to pieces...
Ian: I also don't like the German two-way-voting system. Especially as it is complicated and nobody can really understand why and when first votes are compensated with additional seats in the parliament. But what I'd aim on is getting rid off the first votes and have the party vote only. Cause the US system (German first vote merely) completely neglects minorities - if 10% or what want Nader, why shouldn't these people get someone representing their interest with exactly these 10%. You entirely avoid new parties to enter, which can't be very helpful for modernising the politics. And if I'm considering the first votes of my election district... basically I want none of them in the Bundestag. Anthony: the 5% rule [3% in local elections] is indeed a hurdle for ultra parties. In the 20s they didn't have it and numerous parties were in the parliament, making it necessary to have elections almost every few months as it was almost impossible to find a good working government. This is one of the main reasons why Hitler got the power, so this rule avoids these problems. @Hadj_ullelah: look at the time of my post, it was very early this evening when anyone saw a clear victory of CDU. I don't know if you're following German media, but nobody sees CDU as loser. They won about 3% compared to the last elections and this though they had to clean the party after the too long Kohl government and the party financing scandal. They won seats and can make more pressure on the government - sure, they wanted to govern, but FDP is the reason why they can't and not their result. The East decided the vote, this is true, though I don't know if it was very clever for themselves. For those who don't know: East voted about 40% SPD, 30% CDU and 20% PDS IIRC. The Greens have no real political content for me. I appreciate them as 5% opposition party, but I think they are unable to govern and they proved that in the last 4 years (and in numerous state governments). Fischer is surely not the problem, he is okay - and concentrating on his personality and not on subject matters was the best move the Greens probably ever did. I still call them chaos troup, something that got evident in the Afghanistan and Security Package discussion when their whole base was in huge excitement as their own politicians didn't do what the party programme says. Okay, chaos may be the wrong word, but they lost some of their credibility by proving that power is also the most important thing for them - and their twisted relation with the base of their party will make them shake again when the Iraq matter gets hot. Regarding the persons you mentioned: Möllemann is an idiot who harmed the whole party and maybe even is responsible for still having the red-green coalition - but he doesn't stand for the FDP as such. Beckstein is a conservative hardliner, he's not fishing for right-wing but middle-right votes, the traditional CSU supporters. And this worked out btw, see sensational 56% for CSU in Bavaria. Schröder was playing with fear of war and anti-USA comments, so he's not really a nicer guy than the two you mentioned. SPD wouldn't be seen as winner if they were on the opposition side now. Having the chancellor is the only thing making them a winner (which is the key of the election, of course). But they also lost about 3% and much more dramatic for them: in the internal coalition the Greens got a stronger position now. Remember Schröder/Struck/Müntefering surpressing the Greens in questions of war in Afghanistan and the security package after 9/11; they could only do this by flirting with the FDP - something that's not possible anymore (and I'm definitely not jubilating because of that).