This GD Thread discusses the 1911 law that fixed the number of members of the U.S. House of Representatives at 435. Prior to 1911, the membership of the House had been set proportionially to the population, at variying ratios of legislators to population over the years.
This got me thinking about the size, election process and powers of the national legislatures of other countries.
The Constitution gives Congress the power to enact laws setting the number of Representatives, so long as the representation of each state is proportionial to its population and each state gets at least one Representative. Each Representative is elected from a district within a state (or the whole state for the smallest states), and there are no districts that cross state lines. Elections are for two year terms, with all seats up for election every two years.
The U.S. Senate is fixed under the Constitution at Two Senators for each state, giving it 100 members at present. Each Senator is elected “at large” from his or her state. Senators are elected to six year terms, with approximately one third of the Senate elected every two years.
All Congressional elections are “first past the post”, where the individual candidate with the highest number of votes is elected. Unlike many parlimentary systems, the length of terms and election dates are fixed, and Congress may not be prematurely dissolved.
All laws must be passed by majorities of both houses of Congress (and signed by the President, unless after Presidential veto both houses vote to override the veto by 2/3 margins). Presidential appointments must be confirmed by a majority vote of the Senate, and treaties must be ratified by a 2/3 margin of the Senate, but other than that (and a few minor divisions of responsibility), the powers of the two houses are the same.
For other countries, how is the size of the legislature (and each legislative chamber) determined? How are legislative districts determined? What are the terms of legislators of each chamber? How are legislators elected? Under what conditions, if any, may the legislature be dissolved or otherwise prematurely terminated? And what are the powers of the legislators in each chamber?
The first chamber of the German, the Bundestag, (often translated as “Federal Diet”) has 598 Members usually. Through a detail in the election process this number can rise a bit (5 in the last election.) Elections are held at least every four years, earlier if the parliament is dissolved. Next month this will happen the second time in post-war history.
Half of the regular number of members represent one of 299 districts. The other half is filled from party lists. Every citizen has two votes. One for a candidate in their district, the second one for a party. The number of seats for a party is determined by proportional representation using the “second” vote. Candidates who win a district (via the “first” vote) enter parliament and their seat is deducted from the party’s share. The rest of the seats is filled with candidates from the party lists.
If a party wins more districts in a state than seats based on the “proportional” votes, they can keep those extra seats. This explains the possible additional MPs.
In order to get into the Bundestag, a party has to win either 5% of the popular vote or three districts. MPs who won a district can always keep their seat, even if their party doesn’t make it. This way two socialists won seats in the last election, even if their party didn’t achieve the required 5%.
This chamber elects the Chancellor, the head of the executive. It can replace him at any time by electing a successor. The cabinet is selected by the Chancellor and formally appointed by the mostly ceremonial President. A Chancellor can request a vote of confidence. If the result is negative, he can ask the President to dissolve the Bundestag and hold early elections.
The second chamber is the Bundesrat (“Federal council”) that represents the states. Its members (currently 69) are always the head of the government of a state plus some of his ministers. The number of seats for each state is based on the population very roughly but overrepresenting the small states. This chamber has to approve certain decisions that affect responsibilities of the states.
The lower chamber (called “assemblée nationale”) has 577 members. They’re elected for 5 years, in local districts. These are determined by the executive on the basis of the population. The election use a majority system with a run-off (all candidates getting at least 12,5% of the votes get to run for the “second round”).
The higher chamber (called “senat”) has 330 members. They are elected in the “departements” (more or less a county), each “departement” getting a number of senators dependant on (but not at all proportionnal to) its population. They’re elected indirectly by representants of the elected councils (cities and villages councils, “departement” councils…). Some are also elected by the expatriates. They were elected for 9 years, 1/3 being renewed every three years, but now, it has been changed to 6 years, and the transition period is a little bit complicated (who gets to have to run again when?).
The way they’re elected, the number of representants, etc…(what I wrote above) iisn’t defined by the constitution (which only states that they’re elected in a direct election) hence is determined by a particular kind of law called “organic law” (because it related to the “organization” of the public powers), for which a particular procedure applies. It was changed once, using a kind of proportionnal election in larger districts, but reverted to the usual system for the next election.
Both chambers vote on all laws, but in case of disagreement, a conciliation commission is organized, and if it fails, the “assemblee nationale” has the last word (except for laws related to the senate). So, the senate has much less power.
I would note that the parliament can only pass laws on topics exclusively listed in the constitution. That covers most of what you’d expect a parliament to vote about, but prevents them from passing texts on minute details, for instance.
At the request of the opposition, the law is reviewed by the constitutionnal council (a court which has some of the duties of the SCOTUS) before being signed . It can’t be enacted if found unconstitutionnal.
The lower chamber (“assemblee nationale”) can be dissolved by the president It usually happens after a new presidential election, in particular to get rid of a parliament dominated by the opposition (the elections of the president and of the parliament don’t happen at the same time, contrarily to the USA). It was used once in the latter situation a dozen years ago to keep a firm majority for a longer time (in the way it’s generally used in the UK) but it was resounding failure, since the opposition won in a landslide. The president must wait at least one year before dissolving it again. On the overall, it doesn’t happen often, contrarily to, say, in the UK, where deciding on the “right time” to call for a new parliamentary election (hence dissolve the parliament) is common. The senate can’t be dissolved (but, as I mentionned, as much less power than the lower chamber).
Concerning the declarations of war, they’re voted by the parliament like any other law.
A peculiarity of the french constitution is that it allows the president to take essentially dictatorial powers in some situations (happened once in the 60s when militaries opposed to the independance of Algeria attempted a coup).
That’s a lot of questions. I’ll give some basic details for the Commonwealth parliament in Australia. Each state parliament has its own separate arrangements.
There are two houses of parliament, the House of Representatives (the lower, bigger house) and the Senate (the upper, smaller house). The House is based on population. Each state is divided into a different number of electorates (or seats), with each electorate being represented by a single member. Currently there are 150 members distributed as follows: NSW 50; VIC 37; QLD 28; WA 15; SA 11; TAS 5; ACT 2; NT 2. There are periodic re-distributions (done by the Australian Electoral Commission) where seats are added to, or taken from, states depending on the relative growth in their populations. Each of the six states is guaranteed a minimum of 5 seats.
The Senate has 76 members (12 from each of the 6 states; 2 from each of the 2 territories). The Constitution has a “nexus” provision, requiring that the ratio of House to Senate be approximately 2:1
For the House: 3 years. However the Governor-General can dissolve the House and require fresh elections earlier than 3 years on the advice of the Prime Minister.
For the Senate: 6 years. Basically, at each election for the House, half the senators are elected for 6 year terms. The Senate can only be dissolved using the “double dissolution” provisions of the Constitution. These are applied in cases of serious disagreement between the two houses. Since the establishment of the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901, there have been only 6 double dissolutions (1914, 1951, 1974, 1975, 1983, 1987).
For the House: separate elections in each of the 150 single-member electorates. Compulsory preferential voting is used. Voters mark their ballots showing their order of preference for the candidates 1, 2, 3, 4 etc. To be elected, a candidate must receive at least (50% + 1) of the valid votes cast. If no candidate has achieved this absolute majority after the first preference votes have been counted, there is a distribution of second, third, fourth etc preferences until one candidate obtains the required absolute majority.
For the Senate: each state and territory acts a single electorate. Senators are elected using the Single Transferable Vote (STV) method. Voters mark their ballots showing their order of preference for the candidates 1, 2, 3, 4 etc. To be elected a candidate must receive a “quota” of votes. The quota is defined as:
Quota = (Total Formal Votes) / (No of senators being elected +1)
This quota can either be achieved on first preference votes, or after subsequent preferences have been distributed.
The powers of the two houses are almost equal. The main difference is that only the House can originate bills for the appropriate of revenue or the imposition of taxation. The Senate can’t originate these bills, or amend them when they receive them from the House. However the Senate can refuse to pass them and instead return them to the House requesting that the bills be amended.
I meant it’s normally used when a newly elected president faces a parliament dominated by the opposition. But once it was used while the president already had a majority, and expected a new election to send back the same majority now, but maybe not two years later. And it turned out he was completely mistaken.
I would add that since the government must be approved by the parliament, having an opposition-dominated parliament means that the opposition take over the government, while the president retains only some very limited powers (though much more significant than in countries with a “ceremonial president”). You could say (in a very caricatural way) that France has a US-style presidential system when the president has a majority in the parliament, which turns into an UK-style parliamentary sytem when he doesn’t (It’s still technically a parliamentary system, though an unusual one).
This is an interesting thread, Billdo. For the benefit of the non-American respondants I will add a little bit about the US cabinet, which does not resemble the cabinet in parliamentary systems in any way, and is often a source of confusion.
Unlike a parliamentary system, the US cabinet is part of the executive branch and entirely separate from the legislative. The cabinet secretaries are not legislators and they are directly subordinate to the President. They are also often highly specialized in their field, so “reshuffling” of cabinet members is rare, but does happen on occasion. Cabinet members are usually politicians or former military officers, or sometimes high-profile corporate leaders. The President can appoint anyone he wants, but they must be confirmed by a majority vote in the Senate. Once confirmed the person must resign any other political office he may hold. The President can fire any cabinet member, in which case they’d be out of a job. (They don’t get to go back to whatever they resigned from without being elected again.)
In Canada, the federal Parliament is composed of the House of Commons, the Senate, and the Queen.
The primary legislative chamber is the House of Commons. The Parliament of Canada has the power to set the size of the Commons by an ordinary act of Parliament. Currently, the Constitution Act, 1867 defines the Commons as follows:
There are two key restrictions on Parliament’s power to set the size of the Commons: the so-called “Senate floor” rule, and the grandfather clause. The Senate floor rule says that each province is intitled to at least the same number of seats in the Commons that it has in the Senate (see s. 51A of the Constitution Act, 1867). The grandfather rule, set out in s. 51, provides that no province can lose seats as a result of an increase of seats in the Commons following a census.
Both of these rules are a departure from strict “rep by pop”. The practical political reason for these exceptional provisions is that our Senate lacks political legitimacy, being purely appointed. Since the Senate of Canada, like the US Senate, was created to provide the smaller provinces with greater political authority, this means that there are political pressures to protect the interests of the smaller provinces in the Commons, the primary legislative body. Hence, these provisions which have the effect of inflating the representation of the smaller provinces in the Commons, beyond what a strict allocation according to population would give them.
The Senate is composed of four “divisions”, each with 24 Senators: the three Maritime provinces, Quebec, Ontario, and the four Western provinces. However, when Newfoundland joined Confederation in 1949, it was not added to the Maritime division. Instead, Newfoundland was assigned six members that did not belong to the maritime division. As well, each of the three territories has one senator, also outside of the four divisions. This hodge-podge produces the following numbers:
Ontario: 24 senators
Quebec: 24 senators
Nova Scotia: 10 senators
New Brunswick: 10 senators
Prince Edward Island: 4 senators
Manitoba: 6 senators
Saskatchewan: 6 senators
Alberta: 6 senators
British Columbia: 6 senators
Newfoundland & Labrador: 6 senators
Northwest Territories: 1 senator
Yukon: 1 senator
Nunavut: 1 senator
for a total of 105 senators.
Parliament has the power to set the legislative districts for the House of Commons. While in the past, Parliament did so directly, with considerable partisan political shenanigans, in recent decades it has handed the task off to non-partisan boundary commissions, one for each province. Parliament normally accepts the recommendations of those commissions and enacts them into law. By and large, this process is generally accepted as fair and non-partisan.
In all the provinces except Quebec, the Senators are appointed at large.
In Quebec, the Senators are appointed according to the electoral map for the old Legislative Council of the Province of Canada, which was abolished in 1867 upon the establishment of Canada.
**Members of the House of Commons do not have a fixed term. They serve for the duration of the particular House of Commons to which they have been elected. Section 4 of the Constitution Act, 1982 provides that the House of Commons has a maximum duration of 5 years, unless extended by a vote of the Commons during a time of war or insurrection.
In practice, electiions are called every four or so years, but the Commons can be dissolved sooner. That frequently happens when there is a minority government, as is currently the case.
Senators used to serve for life, but now must retire at age 75.
Members of the Commons are elected by a first past the post system in each constituency, sometimes called “ridings.” The elections are governed entirely by federal law - the provinces do not have any power to regulate federal elections.
Senators are not elected. They are appointed by the Governor General upon the advice of the federal Cabinet.
It is this appointment process which deprives the Senate of any political legitimacy. Although it has ample legislative powers, in practice it will not use those powers contrary to te decisions of the democratically elected Commons.
The Governor General can dissolve the Commons at any time. Normally, the Governor General exercises this power only on the advice of the Prime Minister, but in extremely rare cases the GovGen may refuse to dissolve the Commons.
Normally, the Commons lasts for about four years, but if there’s a minority government, the Commons can be dissolved well before the four year period. Most minority governments don’t last much past two years.
The Senate can never be dissolved.
**Parliament’s legislative powers are set out in section 91. The consent of both Houses, plus royal assent from the Crown, is necessary to enact a federal statute. There are two formal differences between the Commons and the Senate. First, money bills must be introduced in the Commons. Second, for certain constitutional amendments, the Senate only has a delaying power.
I do hate to be frivolous after so many excellent factual answers, but I felt it very much in the spirit of the board to tell you I read that as “Size, Erection and Powers of Members of National Legislatures” and didn’t realize my mistake until I’d actually clicked on the link.
The Norwegian legislature is the Storting, which is divided into two chambers for the purpose of approving laws, but is otherwise one chamber. Who gets to be in which chamber is decided somehow by the legislature.
The government is formed by the party, or parties, who can get the support of at least 50% the Storting. It remains in power until losing a lack of confidence vote in the Storting (initiated by the storting, or by the government). The department ministers are often politicians, but are also recruited from business, education and the bureucracy.
how is the size of the legislature (and each legislative chamber) determined?
The size is decided by law. The legislature makes the law, and the last change was made in 2003 setting the number at 169.
**How are legislative districts determined? **
The legislative districts are equal to the 19 Fylker, usually translated as counties.
What are the terms of legislators of each chamber?
Parliamentary elections are held every four years.
How are legislators elected?
For each election district parties running in that distric present a numbered list of candidates. (For the most part)Voters vote for one list, i.e. for a party. The number of votes is divided by 1.4 - 3 - 5 - 7 - 9 - 11 etc. The party with the highest quotient gets the first mandate, the party with the second highest quotient gets the second mandate, and so on.
19 equalisation mandates are distributed to the parties who had the largest (negative) difference between the percentage of country wide votes and actual seats, and who had at least 4% of the country wide votes. The system with equalisation mandates was introduced in 1989.
Under what conditions, if any, may the legislature be dissolved or otherwise prematurely terminated?
None. This issue is currently under debate. Some people want such a law since we’ve had minority governments for the last couple of elections, and they’re afraid we’ll have a deadlock and no way to solve it.
And what are the powers of the legislators in each chamber?
Voting on laws and instructions to the government.
I just wanted to say a bit more about when Parliament might be dissolved. The following refers to custom and politics, not to constitutional law. (Much of Canada’s political procedure is by custom; the Prime Minister isn’t even mentioned in the constitution.)
In a majority government situation (i.e. one party controls more than 50% of the seats in Parliament), party discipline (i.e. MPs are required by their parties to vote the same way, which is usually the case) implies that the government can last as long as it likes, up to five years. In such a case, the Prime Minister will decide on an election date in function of his or her political fortunes – typically preferring elections in spring and autumn when the economy is good and when there are no inconvenient scandals.
In a minority government (one party holds the largest total of seats but this is less than 50%, so that the other parties have more seats in total), things are much more volatile. In such a case, the government can be defeated in two ways:
a non-confidence motion, basically just a motion that says “Resolved that the government does not have the confidence of the House” - if this passes, the government no longer has the mandate to govern; and
a denial of supply – essentially, the defeat of any bill dealing with getting or spending money, the principle being that if the government cannot rally the House around such a bill, it is hamstrung and the government cannot function.
In either case, the Prime Minister must do one of two things:
resign together with the Cabinet and permit another person who can demonstrate the confidence of the House (this would usually be the leader of the next largest party, in coalition or alliance with other opposition parties);
request that the Governor General dissolve Parliament and call an election, to enable him or her to seek a mandate from the people.
Minority governments do not often last long, since either the government does a bad job and the above happens, or the government does a good job and then calls an election to try to seek a majority.
We currently have a particularly unsteady minority government. In May, the government tabled its budget; it passed through an equal vote of the House, with the Speaker casting the tie-breaking vote (something that I don’t believe had ever happened yet). It was a whole political saga involving a deal between the government and the NDP to make the budget more to our taste and earn our support; the surprise defection of a senior member of the opposition Conservatives; and a white-knuckle last-minute stand with the government by an independent MP who subsequently died of cancer.
Had the government fallen and the House been dissolved, all the bills then before the House would have “died on the order paper” and would have had to be reintroduced. This would have included Bill C-38, the same-sex marriage legislation, as well as many other important bills such as the ratification of a Labrador Inuit land claim, an offshore petrochemical deal between Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia, and so forth.
[Emily Litella voice] Never mind. [/Emily Litella]
Actually, Radner did actually use this as a bit during the 1976 presidential election. The fact that I remember a 29 year old comedy routine makes me feel very old.
:eek:
More on Canada’s Parliament can be found in How Canadians Govern Themselves, an excellent informational booklet authored by Senator Eugene Forsey, a well-known and respected expert on the subject.
Note that one difference between the US system and the Canadian sytem is that the US President has a limited power of veto which can be used freely but is subject to override by a 2/3 vote of Congress. The Queen (or her representative, the Governer-General) has a theoretical absolute veto power in that she can refuse royal assent to any bill, but one that is so limited by custom (the “unwritten” part of our Constitution) so that it is unuseable in practical terms except in extreme situations.
slight nitpick - the Queen doesn’t have a veto; her consent is necessary for a bill to become law, because she is part of Parliament, equal in power to the Commons and the Senate: Constitution Act, 1867, s. 17 . For a bill to become law, both houses of Parliament and the Queen must agree to it. In other words, the Queen’s power is a positive one, which applies to every piece of legislation. If she does nothing in respect of a particular bill, it does not become law, even if both the Commons and the Senate have passed it.
This is different from the President’s veto power, which is a negative power. The President must take action to stop a bill from becoming law. If the president does nothing once both houses of Congress pass a bill, it automatically becomes law 10 days later: U.S. Constitution, Article I, § 7.
Of course, Bookkeeper’s main point is that the Queen never refuses royal assent, because to do so would be unconstitutional. She always acts on the advice of the Cabinet and Prime Minister.
true, but the Constitution gives the Congress control over its own adjournments, so they could prevent a pocket veto by staying in session for the ten days following final passage of the bill; hence the phrasing of the provision:
Also, a bill that fails under a pocket veto could be re-introduced at the next session and passed without needing a two-thirds majority.
The fact that I remember a 29 year old comedy routine makes me feel very old.