AP Comparative Day 25 AgendaAP Comparative Day 25 AgendaGoal – To understand that different electoral systems have multiple

results and that political culture affects the entire system through voting patterns.

1. Questions from reading about electoral systems2. Analyze the different electoral systems from AR 15 (STV, AMS, AV+,

SMD FPTP)

a) Identify democratic principles associated with each methodb) Which electoral system is the most democratic? Why?c) Identify criteria you would use to evaluate an electoral system as

“best”d) Evaluate which electoral system is “best” and explain why

3. Finish S-F diagram of process functions for UK4. Complete ST chart ST 1 and 2 for UK5. Read voter behavior reports – answer the following questions

and cite evidence from the readings.a) Why are there voter turnout disparities in different districts?b) Why did people vote as they did?c) How does this report relate to wildavsky?d) Does this report shed light on differences of legitimacy of regime

and government?e) How was 2005 different from 2001?

1. Why are there voter turnout disparities in different districts?Likelihood for voter turnout – the more likely a vote matters

based on previous marginality (lower the margin of victory <5% v >20%), the higher the turnout (see table 2)

The likelihood of a Labour victory in a district led to lower voter turnout – probably due to dissatisfaction with Labour

2. Why did people vote as they did?Rational actor – there are benefits to voting or the civic voluntarism rationale – that it is the right thing to do

based on social, cultural religious reasonsMost likely, because the voter turnout changed but the social

factors don’t in a single election cycle, the reasons for voting or not must be related to the rational actor model (if these are the only two choices)

Probably voted for or against based on 3 factors:Party identification – there is a pre-election psychological

attachmentleadership evaluations – using a simple likeability heuristic to

“avoid examining the complexities of policy alternatives and past performace

issue perceptions – how the voters perceived if a party’s program effectively addressed the concern most important to the voter

Voting Trends 2001 & 2005Voting Trends 2001 & 2005

3. How does this report relate to wildavsky? – voters will use limited information, simplistic measuring devices and historical conenctions to party affiliation – using a gut feeling, rather than a complex cost-benefit analysis.

4. Does this report shed light on differences of legitimacy of regime and government. YES – while there is general discontent and dissatisfaction with the parties, including the ruling Labourites, the issues of importance were policy rather than regime-based.However, the continued low voter turnout may bode ill for future democratic practices, possibly leading to a retrenchment from democratization

3. How was 2005 different from 2001? Not very different re: why people voted, they wanted social service improvements, high evaluations of leadership qualities and voted often based on party affiliation.While issues changed a bit after 9/11, and there were lower votes for Labour, the views of the issues and leadership did not change enough to affect the outcome – Labour saw a 5pt decline for 355 MPs, but Tories only a 2 pt increase – 197 MPs – LDP saw the biggest jump – up 4 pts 62 MPs

Voting Trends 2001 & 2005Voting Trends 2001 & 2005

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom was established in law by Part 3 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The Lord Chancellor has announced[1] that it will start work in October 2009 once its new premises are ready.

It will take over the judicial functions of the Law Lords in the House of Lords and some functions from the Judicial committee of the Privy Council. The supreme court will be the final court of appeal in all matters under English law, Welsh law (to the extent that the Welsh Assembly make laws for Wales that differ from those in England) and Northern Irish law.

It will not have authority over criminal cases in Scotland, where the High Court of Justiciary will remain the supreme court. However, it may hear appeals from the Court of Session, just as the House of Lords can today.

It may hear cases of dispute between the three devolved governments - the Northern Ireland Executive, the Scottish Executive and the Welsh Assembly Government - and the UK government, taking over this function from the Privy Council.

Ethnic cleavages – between white brits and asians (Indian sub=continent) – non-discrimination laws, stircter rules on estates agents, stricter citizenship requirements like oath and test

CLASS – represented institutionally by Lords v Commons – changing lords membership, discussions of voting for lords

Generation – old traditional, young and cosmopolitan – Blair and New Labor, government on-line, dereg on satellite

Nationality – Wales v Scotland v England v Ireland ---devolution

Religion – (in Ireland) muslims v christian – a muslim or two in cabinet, gov’t money for religious schools, muslim-gov’t cooperation

Gender – increase in MP women in 1997 and then decrease in subsequent elections – symbolic performance

Region – wales, England, Scotland, Ireland, Greater London, etc ---devolution

Linguistic – Welsh, English, Scottish, Gaelic

Education – public v private – small increases in tuition for “private” University (what we call public)

Social cleavages in the UKSocial cleavages in the UK