Italian Elections and Politics 2022 - Our Time to Schlein

[Conservatopia]

Could somebody please give a overview of how the electoral law works at the moment?

What exactly does it mean that Lega and FI are in coalition?  Do you vote for the CDX or for individual parties within the coalition?  How do coalitions work in single member seats?

I think I recall that Sardinian Action ran with Lega at the last election.  However they aren't part of the CDX per se?  How does that work?

Likewise Raffaele Fitto had his own party (Direction which had ties to the Tories) which was inside NcI which in turn was part of the CDX.  What was going on there?

Sorry - a lot of questions about the complex law!

Using the current electoral law:

1. You vote for a single list, and the vote is also transferred to the single-member constituency candidate put up by that list. Parties can form coalitions, which means that they all stand behind the same candidate in each constituency (though that candidate is officially affiliated to one of the lists that support him - or is an independent).

2. The Partito Sardo d'Azione (party) didn't run as an autonomous list in 2018, but ran some candidates inside the Lega lists. Lega in turn was one of the four lists inside the CDX coalition.

3. Likewise Fitto's party ran candidates inside the Noi con l'Italia lists. And NcI was one of the four lists inside the CDX coalition too.

Thanks for that!

So you only cast one vote?  And say I wanted to vote Lega on the list but didn't like the FI candidate in my constituency then tough my Lega vote counts towards that FI candidate's total?

That's naff if it's the case.  I'm all for MMP but it should be that you cast two votes - one for the list and one for the FPTP seat.

[Diouf]

Thanks for that!

So you only cast one vote?  And say I wanted to vote Lega on the list but didn't like the FI candidate in my constituency then tough my Lega vote counts towards that FI candidate's total?

That's naff if it's the case.  I'm all for MMP but it should be that you cast two votes - one for the list and one for the FPTP seat.

It's not a MMP system. There is no overall proportionality. It's a mixed system, where 37% of seats are distributed via FPTP and 63% via PR. So the significant share of FPTP seats, mean that the overall outcome can be quite disproportional.

[Cortarán todas las flores, pero jamás detendrán la primavera]

Thanks for that!

So you only cast one vote?  And say I wanted to vote Lega on the list but didn't like the FI candidate in my constituency then tough my Lega vote counts towards that FI candidate's total?

That's naff if it's the case.  I'm all for MMP but it should be that you cast two votes - one for the list and one for the FPTP seat.

It's not a MMP system. There is no overall proportionality. It's a mixed system, where 37% of seats are distributed via FPTP and 63% via PR. So the significant share of FPTP seats, mean that the overall outcome can be quite disproportional.

Is it what's sometimes called "parallel voting"?

[Diouf]

Is it what's sometimes called "parallel voting"?

Yes, I have seen that term used. It is similar to the Hungarian system; just slightly more proportional as the FPTP share of seats in Hungary is all the way up at 53%.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

So you only cast one vote?  And say I wanted to vote Lega on the list but didn't like the FI candidate in my constituency then tough my Lega vote counts towards that FI candidate's total?

That's naff if it's the case.  I'm all for MMP but it should be that you cast two votes - one for the list and one for the FPTP seat.

Yes, you only cast one vote, which is one of the many stupid aspects of this law. And, as diouf said, it is not an MMP system.

[palandio]

So you only cast one vote?  And say I wanted to vote Lega on the list but didn't like the FI candidate in my constituency then tough my Lega vote counts towards that FI candidate's total?

That's naff if it's the case.  I'm all for MMP but it should be that you cast two votes - one for the list and one for the FPTP seat.

Yes, you only cast one vote, which is one of the many stupid aspects of this law. And, as diouf said, it is not an MMP system.

In Germany ideas to introduce a Grabenwahlrecht ("moat electoral law") similar to the Rosatellum existed in the 60s. "Moat" because the expectation was that voters would cast a vote for one of CDU/CSU or SPD because of the FPTP part and that smaller parties would "fall into the moat" because there were 50% proportional seats, but no second vote. It was one of several issus that over time led to an alienation of the FDP from CDU/CSU and to the social-liberal coalition in 1969.

I think that for example in Italian regional and comune-level electoral law the disjoint vote is actually very questionable. With your governor/mayor vote you determine which coalition gets 60% (or a similar number) of the seats and then you can influence the composition of the other coalition with your list vote. That's nonsensical.

But the Rosatellum abolished the disjoint vote in a situation where this would not have been a problem. Therefore I think that the motivation was similar to the one behind the Grabenwahlrecht: Make this a two-coalition fight between center-left and center-right and prevent proportional votes for parties outside of the coalitions (in particular M5S). It just didn't work at all.

[brucejoel99]

Again, a potentially stupid question from somebody who doesn't actively pay attention to Italian politics outside of significant moments like this, but just genuinely curious: would Draghi be inclined to keep Conte on-board in a high-up position like foreign minister or something along those lines, or is Conte just done?

[FrancoAgo]

Actually we have not a electoral law, the law is for the old number of parliament member
we need at minimum a new law with the new constituencies and districts

[Antonio the Sixth]

Actually we have not a electoral law, the law is for the old number of parliament member
we need at minimum a new law with the new constituencies and districts

Unfortunately, that law was already enacted as a decree a couple months ago. I'm afraid the Rosatellum will be quite operational if government formation fails and we go to news elections.

Again, a potentially stupid question from somebody who doesn't actively pay attention to Italian politics outside of significant moments like this, but just genuinely curious: would Draghi be inclined to keep Conte on-board in a high-up position like foreign minister or something along those lines, or is Conte just done?

That probably depends on M5S. If they 1. are willing to play ball with a Draghi government, and 2. are interested in sticking it out for Conte, then I'd expect Draghi  and other coalition partners to be okay with that. M5S' own behavior, though, is often harder to predict.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Actually we have not a electoral law, the law is for the old number of parliament member
we need at minimum a new law with the new constituencies and districts

Well actually there are new constituencies and districts, redrawn in record time, and the Rosato law should be able to adapt to them.

https://www.youtrend.it/2020/11/28/nuovi-collegi-del-rosatellum-le-mappe-interattive-youtrend/

Actually we have not a electoral law, the law is for the old number of parliament member
we need at minimum a new law with the new constituencies and districts

Unfortunately, that law was already enacted as a decree a couple months ago. I'm afraid the Rosatellum will be quite operational if government formation fails and we go to news elections.

Yes. And I hate it, among other things because come on, what the frock does it mean to have single-member constituencies for the Senate that are almost as large as those for the American House of Representatives? Lmao

Also, the design is hilarious if you consider it was made by a centre-left government. They could have at least tried not to make a Milan Central and a Rome Central Camera constituencies that look perfectly made to waste centre-left votes.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes. And I hate it, among other things because come on, what the frock does it mean to have single-member constituencies for the Senate that are almost as large as those for the American House of Representatives? Lmao

Also, the design is hilarious if you consider it was made by a centre-left government. They could have at least tried not to make a Milan Central and a Rome Central Camera constituencies that look perfectly made to waste centre-left votes.

The worst part about the Rosatellum is that it's not even REALLY a single-member constituency system. You have only one vote that counts for both party lists AND your constituency vote, so if you want to vote for a given party you're locked into supporting their candidate in the relevant constituency. That KILLS THE WHOLE POINT of single-member constituencies, since it means voters can't vote for candidates on their individual merits.

This law is a monstrosity. I'd honestly prefer the Porcellum, as at least it's more honest about what it's doing.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Yes. And I hate it, among other things because come on, what the frock does it mean to have single-member constituencies for the Senate that are almost as large as those for the American House of Representatives? Lmao

Also, the design is hilarious if you consider it was made by a centre-left government. They could have at least tried not to make a Milan Central and a Rome Central Camera constituencies that look perfectly made to waste centre-left votes.

The worst part about the Rosatellum is that it's not even REALLY a single-member constituency system. You have only one vote that counts for both party lists AND your constituency vote, so if you want to vote for a given party you're locked into supporting their candidate in the relevant constituency. That KILLS THE WHOLE POINT of single-member constituencies, since it means voters can't vote for candidates on their individual merits.

This law is a monstrosity. I'd honestly prefer the Porcellum, as at least it's more honest about what it's doing.

I agree, though I don't prefer Porcellum in a million years, and if they hadn't cut the number of members of Parliament - - I would have somewhat liked to keep this law for quite some time, as hideous as it is, because I'm freaking sick of having a new electoral law be written every half decade.

Also *checks all the recommends to my last Italy 2019 project thread* the old constituencies were quite fun.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes. And I hate it, among other things because come on, what the frock does it mean to have single-member constituencies for the Senate that are almost as large as those for the American House of Representatives? Lmao

Also, the design is hilarious if you consider it was made by a centre-left government. They could have at least tried not to make a Milan Central and a Rome Central Camera constituencies that look perfectly made to waste centre-left votes.

The worst part about the Rosatellum is that it's not even REALLY a single-member constituency system. You have only one vote that counts for both party lists AND your constituency vote, so if you want to vote for a given party you're locked into supporting their candidate in the relevant constituency. That KILLS THE WHOLE POINT of single-member constituencies, since it means voters can't vote for candidates on their individual merits.

This law is a monstrosity. I'd honestly prefer the Porcellum, as at least it's more honest about what it's doing.

I agree, though I don't prefer Porcellum in a million years, and if they hadn't cut the number of members of Parliament - - I would have somewhat liked to keep this law for quite some time, as hideous as it is, because I'm freaking sick of having a new electoral law be written every half decade.

Also *checks all the recommends to my last Italy 2019 project thread* the old constituencies were quite fun.

Honestly, the Mattarellum was a fine system. It had decoupled votes that allowed voters to pick their preferred local candidate, fairly small constituencies, and compensatory PR to ensure that the overall parliament wasn't too disproportional. There was some room for abuse with the shell parties, but it wasn't that big a deal all considered. We could have easily gone back to it in 2018, but nooooo, we had to invent this abomination instead.

[FrancoAgo]

thanks for the update, they did it the last days of the year

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Honestly, the Mattarellum was a fine system. It had decoupled votes that allowed voters to pick their preferred local candidate, fairly small constituencies, and compensatory PR to ensure that the overall parliament wasn't too disproportional. There was some room for abuse with the shell parties, but it wasn't that big a deal all considered. We could have easily gone back to it in 2018, but nooooo, we had to invent this abomination instead.

I agree, it was better than this (although the scorporo in practice was totally nonsensical - I don't know why they didn't devise a better system for proportionality). And of course, the smaller constituencies were a great thing.

[FrancoAgo]

imo the best system was the original, the proportional before of the Mattarellum,
the alone change that could been acceptable was to delete the CUN and redesign the districts* in same population fashion, this only for the Chamber. the Senate law was ok

* but not grow the districts number, stay with around 30 district so to get around 20 deputies for each

[MRCVzla]

Likewise Raffaele Fitto had his own party (Direction which had ties to the Tories) which was inside NcI which in turn was part of the CDX.  What was going on there?

Sorry - a lot of questions about the complex law!

3. Likewise Fitto's party ran candidates inside the Noi con l'Italia lists. And NcI was one of the four lists inside the CDX coalition too.

Fitto's party (Direzione Italia) merged with Fratelli d'Italia since 2019 (and was the access card for Queen Giorgia to enter into ECR party and EP group).

I believe that the current electoral horizon for the minor centrist parties within CDX, have would be either to remake a "quarta gamba" between Noi con l'Italia, UDC and Cambiamo! or that some of them join the lists of the major CDX parties (likely NCI and UDC in the FI list while Toti and allies in the FdI one) in the event that a new proportional electoral law is done.

If the Rosatellum remains in force, members of these parties could run as candidates in safe single-member districts for the CDX (as happened with the candidates elected by NCI-UDC in 2018, although at that time they expected better results in the South, overshadowed for the outstanding performance of the M5S).

[Former President tack50]

Why has Italy changed its election law so many times anyways?

To be honest I think the way to go for Italy would be a simple "return to basics", abolish the FPTP seats and simply use pure PR (with an election threshold at say, 3%); which to my understanding is what Italy already did before 1994 anyways?

If Italy wants to a majoritarian system instead, my take is to simply use good old FPTP with nothing else, like the UK or US do. Perhaps in a 2 round system format like France does in legislative elections.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Why has Italy changed its election law so many times anyways?

To be honest I think the way to go for Italy would be a simple "return to basics", abolish the FPTP seats and simply use pure PR (with an election threshold at say, 3%); which to my understanding is what Italy already did before 1994 anyways?

If Italy wants to a majoritarian system instead, my take is to simply use good old FPTP with nothing else, like the UK or US do. Perhaps in a 2 round system format like France does in legislative elections.

I agree that the best law was the one used (at the Chamber) during the First Party System.

As to all the changes:

Part 1.
In the late 1980's and especially early 1990's everything about the political system was seen as pretty stale and people were generally fed up, calls for muh reforms were quite common. Now, you can see how proposal for majoritarianism worked quite well there.
Mani pulite was opening a Pandora's box on, well, everything, and that includes this front. In 1993 the leader of the "Majoritarian System Good" camp, Mariotto Segni, managed to call a referendum on the Senate electoral law. Brief background: the Senate law was actually a mixed system, but the majoritarian part only activated when if one candidate got 65% of the votes in their constituency, which was basically impossible, so in practice it worked like a proportional law. It was so obvious to everyone that the constituencies were just a pro forma that they were never redrawn, even though by the 1990's some had triple the population of others. The referendum abolished the 65% threshold and opened up to (mixed) majoritarianism.

Part 2.

Literally all Italian ones in the last thirty years.

1993
75% majoritarian and 25% proportional for no reason at all. No actually the reason was to force bipolarism upon people without totally scrapping the proportional.
The proportional part was closed lists for the Chamber of Deputies. For the Senate it was literally giving seats to the best losers in the region.
Ah and there was this magical thing called scorporo which basically meant that majoritarian candidates were linked to proportional lists and when you won your constituency your votes got subtracted from your list's proportional tally and it was just hilariously minoritarian until politicians got smarter and in 2001 both the left and the right just linked all their majoritarian candidates to fake lists to shift the scorporo burden on the fake lists.
After that it was decided to make a new law.

2005
100% proportional but had much bigger problems.
Literally if your coalition took 26% of the votes and the other coalition took 25% of the votes, you were automatically guaranteed 55% of the seats. However only in the Chamber of Deputies because in the Senate it worked on a regional basis (which tended to neutralize the effect if different coalitions won different regions).
Also closed lists, again.
In the end it was declared unconstitutional lol.

2017
37% majoritarian and 63% proportional for no reason at all. No actually the reason is that the Senate has half the seats of the Chamber of Deputies and they thought recycling the 1993 Senate map for the 2017 Chamber was a clever idea saving a lot of work to lawmakers.
The proportional part is closed lists. You can't even make panachage. Choice level = 0.
Hilarious gerrymandering in the Senate (really, look at the Emilia-Romagna map, it doesn't make any sense).
This is going to end soon since too bad we have just cut the number of Deputies and Senators - because we are stupid - and this is now obsolete.

To add to that, the 2005 law change was made by the centre-right government I think in part because it perceived itself as disfavoured by the single-member constituencies or something like that.

[njwes]

Apologies if this was addressed way back in the post, but if the next election produces a right-wing majority and FI, Lega, and FdI agree to form a government (which I'm assuming they would) how much could such a government actually get done and accomplish? I understand that they're both* positioned as "right-wing" and populist-y (maybe more accurate for FdI than Lega) and that they've both positioned themselves as somewhat anti-left/anti-globalist/anti-neoliberal--finding the right terminology here is tricky lol--but how much common ground actually exists between them in terms of reforms, laws, regulations, policy etc that they wish to enact (or maybe repeal)?

*Using "both" because I assume that FI wouldn't have a ton of say in a right-wing government's actual policy, but I could be totally wrong.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Apologies if this was addressed way back in the post, but if the next election produces a right-wing majority and FI, Lega, and FdI agree to form a government (which I'm assuming they would) how much could such a government actually get done and accomplish? I understand that they're both* positioned as "right-wing" and populist-y (maybe more accurate for FdI than Lega) and that they've both positioned themselves as somewhat anti-left/anti-globalist/anti-neoliberal--finding the right terminology here is tricky lol--but how much common ground actually exists between them in terms of reforms, laws, regulations, policy etc that they wish to enact (or maybe repeal)?

*Using "both" because I assume that FI wouldn't have a ton of say in a right-wing government's actual policy, but I could be totally wrong.

1. Forza Italia would not have a ton to say but it would have still a bit to say (in part because most likely its support would be decisive for such a government, just like the support of Italia Viva was decisive for Conte II).

2. Actually it is Lega that has the more populist-y posturing (and more downscale electorate), even though Fratelli d'Italia is likely a bit more populist/interventionist on concrete policy.

3. I think they share enough common ground to pass, or try to pass, quite a substantive agenda, but I would guess that a big hurdle may arise when the topic of regionalism comes up, to make an obvious example. There may be some attrition on some soshul ishoos as well, but it's unclear.*

4. I know what you are trying to get at by "anti-neoliberal" but it's never a bad day to remind that using the original definition of the word the Italian right-wing is, well, pretty neoliberal.

*it would be absolutely hilarious if, while in government together, Salvini tried to give some concreteness to his pipe dream of reopening brothels and Meloni destroyed his proposal playing the #feminist card

[JoeInator]

I'm sorry if this has already been asked, but I'm totally lost on how all this government formation stuff works. Could someone please explain to me how these multi-party coalitions form and collapse and how someone who isn't a member/leader of one of the parties in government (someone like Conte or Draghi) gets to become Prime Minister? Also, I've heard the terms "center-left coalition" and "center-right coalition" being thrown around. Which parties would fall into each category and are there any that don't fall into either?

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

I'm sorry if this has already been asked, but I'm totally lost on how all this government formation stuff works. Could someone please explain to me how these multi-party coalitions form and collapse and how someone who isn't a member/leader of one of the parties in government (someone like Conte or Draghi) gets to become Prime Minister? Also, I've heard the terms "center-left coalition" and "center-right coalition" being thrown around. Which parties would fall into each category and are there any that don't fall into either?

1. The President of the Republic, who is the head of state, appoints someone to lead the government. That someone consults with various parliamentary forces to see if they are able to garner enough support for a new government. If they believe they have, they present their list of ministers to the President of the Republic, who normally will accept it, and proceed to make the new government take the oath of office, which marks its official beginning. After that the new government needs to receive the confidence of both houses of Parliament within a fixed time (20 days if I recall correctly?). If they somehow lose either motion of confidence, they must resign and the process can start anew.

2. Multi-party coalitions form because basically never a single party has a majority in Parliament.

3. The government may also fall if a motion of no confidence is called on it by the Parliament and it passes, which forces it to resign. Or if the President of the Council of Ministers (i.e. the head of government) resigns by personal choice for whatever reason.

4. The President of the Republic has the right to appoint whomever they wish as head of government. Usually it is a member of Parliament, of course, but times like these where it is not clear which kind of 'natural' governing majority may exist in Parliament are more prone to see the appointment of external figures.

5. The centre-right coalition is currently Forza Italia, Lega, Fratelli d'Italia, and technically also a galaxy of tiny parties mostly working as satellites to FI. The centre-left coalition is Partito Democratico, and then it's not completely clear because left-leaning parties tend to be much more willy-nilly about alliances, but some or all out of +Europa, Italia Viva, Azione, whatever is left of the Greens, whatever the latest name for the Left alliance is (Liberi e Uguali at the last parliamentary election), and technically also a galaxy of tiny parties mostly working as satellites to PD. Movimento 5 Stelle is the clearest example of a party outside of the two coalitions recently, though it may now be considered (maybe??) in the centre-left because it has governed with PD in the Conte II cabinet and it has allied with it in some regional elections recently. All other parties outside the coalitions tend to be tiny and irrelevant.

Hope this helps!

[JoeInator]

I'm sorry if this has already been asked, but I'm totally lost on how all this government formation stuff works. Could someone please explain to me how these multi-party coalitions form and collapse and how someone who isn't a member/leader of one of the parties in government (someone like Conte or Draghi) gets to become Prime Minister? Also, I've heard the terms "center-left coalition" and "center-right coalition" being thrown around. Which parties would fall into each category and are there any that don't fall into either?

1. The President of the Republic, who is the head of state, appoints someone to lead the government. That someone consults with various parliamentary forces to see if they are able to garner enough support for a new government. If they believe they have, they present their list of ministers to the President of the Republic, who normally will accept it, and proceed to make the new government take the oath of office, which marks its official beginning. After that the new government needs to receive the confidence of both houses of Parliament within a fixed time (20 days if I recall correctly?). If they somehow lose either motion of confidence, they must resign and the process can start anew.

2. Multi-party coalitions form because basically never a single party has a majority in Parliament.

3. The government may also fall if a motion of no confidence is called on it by the Parliament and it passes, which forces it to resign. Or if the President of the Council of Ministers (i.e. the head of government) resigns by personal choice for whatever reason.

4. The President of the Republic has the right to appoint whomever they wish as head of government. Usually it is a member of Parliament, of course, but times like these where it is not clear which kind of 'natural' governing majority may exist in Parliament are more prone to see the appointment of external figures.

5. The centre-right coalition is currently Forza Italia, Lega, Fratelli d'Italia, and technically also a galaxy of tiny parties mostly working as satellites to FI. The centre-left coalition is Partito Democratico, and then it's not completely clear because left-leaning parties tend to be much more willy-nilly about alliances, but some or all out of +Europa, Italia Viva, Azione, whatever is left of the Greens, whatever the latest name for the Left alliance is (Liberi e Uguali at the last parliamentary election), and technically also a galaxy of tiny parties mostly working as satellites to PD. Movimento 5 Stelle is the clearest example of a party outside of the two coalitions recently, though it may now be considered (maybe??) in the centre-left because it has governed with PD in the Conte II cabinet and it has allied with it in some regional elections recently. All other parties outside the coalitions tend to be tiny and irrelevant.

Hope this helps!

This cleared a lot of what I was confused about up! Thank you so much!

[Flyersfan232]

Vote for Draghi for PD&M5SS will be a huge error, to the next election Salvini and Meloni will take 60% without FI; a this point try to do a Conte ter government w/o IV go to Senate if not get the confidence go to elections

Having elections right now would genuinely be really bad for Italy. For economic reasons, and also because the electoral law is absolute trash and needs to be made more proportional.

Get the EU money, vaccinate people, start getting the economy out of the ditch, and enact a proportional system. If we get to January 2022, give us the added bonus of another left-leaning President. Then we can go to vote.

Have elections in June then