graphic: Michał M. MajewskiOn the question of what is electoral law for the European Parliament, most people and all politicians answer "very complicated". Politicians either don't realize or just don't. This is best reflected in the fresh message by Władysław Kosiniak-Kamish:
It's a very complicated ordination, and there's no credit for the district. It may happen that there are 7 mandates in 1 province, and there are 2 in the other, so this besides makes the electoral process hard for voters. I think we request to work in the future to change the European Parliament's government so that there is more interest in these elections.
The European elections are the most proportional elections we have in Poland. The bad-known d’Hondt method gives a consequence that is very akin to the proportional 1 – the percent of votes earned translates into almost the same percent of mandates earned. For smaller parties, all vote given in the country regardless of place has an impact on the final result of the elections counted in the mandates of the Euro-Parliamentary. This is just fair and honest electoral ordination.
The election rules in the European elections, as described in the Electoral Code, actually look complicated. I would like to present a "simplified" version of these rules, whose adoption makes it easier to realize how our vote translates into an election result.
Poland – 1 constituency
In all elections in Poland we choose candidates in constituency. Following the experience of the fresh parliamentary and local elections, more and more people see that tiny districts, where a tiny number of Members or Councillors are elected, are a large constraint for smaller groups and make elections proportional only by name. erstwhile there are 6-8 seats to be won in a territory election, winning 10% of the vote is improbable to translate into a single mandate. With this in mind, it may seem that the European elections, where 53 seats are to be divided in Poland this year, and the districts are 13, will greatly favour the largest groups. It's far from true. In these elections, 13 constituencies play no function in the distribution of mandates among the election committees. We can forget about them. For the purposes of converting votes into electoral mandates, Poland is simply a single constituency.
Full proportionality alternatively of d’Hondt
On election day, after counting votes in election committees, all votes cast on the electoral list across the country are summed up. These committees, which have exceeded the vote threshold of 5% of the vote, participate in the division of the mandates by the d’Hondt method.
How the conversion of votes into tickets according to d’Hondt’s algorithm works, I described in the article “D’Hondt – everything was stupid to ask, and yet worth knowing. applicable Election Guide, Part 4‘
Using the d’Hondt method, we should arrange a table with further number of votes divided by natural numbers and scope the 53rd illustration, which sets the “price” of 1 mandate in votes. Instead, we can adopt simplification and presume that the conversion of votes into mandates is full proportional. If we divide 100% by 53, i.e. the number of tickets in Poland we get 1.89%. This is the voter's support, which translates into 1 mandate. In a simplified method, 1.89% of the full number of votes cast per committee, which exceed 5%, sets out the votes needed to get a single mandate. This is simply a reasonably close approximation of the d’Hondt method, due to the fact that with so many seats to divide, further dividing by expanding numbers brings the d’Hondt method closer to full proportionality.
Simplified electoral rules – how did they work in 2014?
How simplified rules work best to check the results of erstwhile elections. The last 2019 election was uninteresting due to the fact that the tickets were divided between the 3 committees. On the another hand, the 2014 elections were more like our current situation – mandates were divided between 5 groups. The results of these 10 years ago elections are summarised in the table below:
Table 1. Conversion of votes into mandates by simplified method for the results of the 2014 European elections
In the first step we reject votes for those committees that did not exceed 5% of the electoral threshold, in 2014 it was almost 900,000 votes. The second step sets the number of votes per mandate. To this end, we divide the sum of the votes of the committees that exceeded the electoral threshold (6 171,836) by 51 (the number of mandates that belonged to Poland in 2014). So the approximation is 121,016. In the 3rd step we divide the number of votes obtained by individual lists by 121,016. For the Civic Platform, specified action results in 18.77, after rounding 19 mandates. In the exact 51st method, the d’Hondt ratio for these results was 118,256 votes. erstwhile we compare our approximate results with the exact d’Hondt method, we will see that they disagree only for 1 committee – the Alliance of the Democratic Left. The simplified method after rounding resulted in 6 mandates, 1 besides many compared to accurate calculations.
For the results of the 2019 election, specified simplification would besides make a mistake with the d’Hondt method and would besides be a single mandate. The simplified method that bypasses the d’Hondt algorithm is not ideal, but its consequence is very close to actual results.
Electoral districts – an auxiliary mechanics for allocating mandates inside the list
For most of us, the conversion of votes into tickets fundamentally concludes the election consequence – we know which lists got how many tickets and that is the most important. little inquisitive readers can skip this part of the article and decision on to summary. More inquisitive erstwhile they read further, they will learn the function of electoral districts in these elections. To find which candidates will become Euro MPs, the number of votes cast on the list in 13 constituencies shall be taken into account. For smaller electoral committees, mandates will come to those districts where they won the most votes. The following table shows the 2014 PSL results in individual electoral districts:
From the division of mandates, which was carried out at national level, we know that PSL has won 4 tickets. The 4 districts where the PSL obtained the most votes are districts No. 5.7.8,10 and there each fall into 1 mandate. In these 4 districts, a ticket is awarded to a candidate who obtained the most votes in the district. It does not substance whether he was on the "one" list, or competed from a further place on the list, it matters who won the most votes.
Distribution of mandates for large groups
Table 3. Allocation of mandates between districts for large groups on the example of KO
What the allocation of mandates for a larger group looks like, we can follow in the following steps in the table above. PO in 2014 won 2,271,215 votes nationwide. In the first step we count. the percent of votes received by PO in individual constituencies. In the second step, we multiply the percent for each territory by 19, due to the fact that that's how many mandates gotta divide KOs. For example, in territory no. 4 (Warsaw and surrounding areas) 308 468 votes were 13.6% of all votes received by PO. After multiplying by 19, we receive 2.581 Euro MPs for this district. In the 3rd step, we are rounding up the number of totals. After this rounding, the sum of POs in all districts is 21, which is 2 besides many compared to 19 mandates won by POs on a national scale. We gotta reject 2 tickets, and to that end we choose 2 districts, where rounding up was the largest. In this case, it was Districts Nos 4 and 8 and in these districts we subtract 1 mandata each, so that the sum for all districts agrees with the number of PO mandates, which was set at the level of the full country. The consequence is seen in the last column of the table. In the 2014 PO election in territory No. 8 she did not win any mandate, and in territory No. 11 she won 3 mandates. This disproportion was only due to the large disparity of the PO's votes in these 2 regions. However, this does not mean that PO votes in territory 8 have been wasted. PO received 19 mandates in 2014, resulting from the sum of votes across the country, including those from territory No 8.
As constituencies play a function only in the division of seats within the pool that has earned the list on a national scale, it is irrelevant what the election consequence has achieved in the individual constituencies of another groupings. In the election this year there are 53 seats in 13 districts to be split. A situation where only 1 mandate will be granted in the territory is possible. There may besides be districts where 7 mandates will be awarded.
Summary
Electoral decree to the European Parliament is the most proportional electoral strategy in Poland. Over the 5% electoral threshold guarantees the electoral list of mandates whose percent share will correspond to the percent of votes earned. For the intent of converting votes into mandates, the full of Poland is simply a single constituency. There is so no problem with wasted votes, as is the case in the elections to the Sejm, where the votes for tickets are counted independently in 41 constituencies. In the elections to the European Parliament, it is very easy to estimation the expected number of mandates that can get a group. present Poland has 53 seats in the Parliament in Brussels. By dividing 100% by 53, we get 1.89%. The number of specified support shall be determined about by successive mandates which, in the elections, will receive the group concerned. The election list, which gets 18.9% of the vote, will get 10 tickets. The group, which will scope 10% of the vote, will receive 5 seats (5×1.89%=9.45%).
Voters who vote abroad, who are treated as third-class voters in the parliamentary order, are full-fledged voters in the European elections. Their voices have the same effect on the consequence as the voices of Poles voting in the country.
Electoral tourism in these elections is not justifiedBecause the vote of all voters is the same. There is no problem with wasted votes in constituency, due to the fact that the conversion into tickets takes place on a national scale. There is besides no reason to vote strategically for parties of the second choice, due to the fact that all groups that exceed the 5% electoral threshold will receive a fair (proportional) condition of the 53 mandates.
For us voters, this is the most transparent election. Anyone may vote at the place of residence for the first election group and all votes shall be equally converted into seats. The fact that politicians have a problem in calculating which place the constituency is "take-over" truly is simply a third-rate subject. In all place in Poland organization leaders should be very active during the election campaign, due to the fact that all vote counts, besides in those constituency where the group has small chance of having the mandate of a Euro MP.
