Blog 7- Duverger's Law in Georgia

Duverger’s law states that the effective number or parties in any electoral district is a function of the electoral rules. The law states that a Single-member district plurality tends to drive out small parties and ultimately produce an arrangement consisting of two large parties (Shively 2012). The law declares that proportional representation systems allow for the existence of more effective parties. Based on this case study concerning the Georgian electoral system, I support the claims made by Duverger’s law.

The country of Georgia elects the legislature on a national level. The Parliament of Georgia has 150 members, elected for a four year term, in a parallel hybrid system. This means that the proportional representation doesn't compensate for dis-proportionality  77 seats are determined by proportional representation and 73 in single seat-constituencies ("Elections in Georgia" 2012).The proportional representation system is a closed party list system, the district magnitude is comprised of 1 seat being allotted to each electoral district. The Georgian voting system does stipulate that only parties exceeding a 5-percent threshold are entitled to win seats under the Proportional Representation system. As for the constituency arrangement, it is a “first past the post” system. In addition, if the majority candidate does not secure at least 30 percent of the valid vote, run-off elections are held between the two leading candidates (“Georgia” 2012).

As a continuation of the electoral rules, voters must be of Georgian citizenship and be at least 18 years of age. Candidacy requirements for the proportional system include nomination by duly registered parties or blocs supported by at least 30,000 electors or already represented in Parliament. In the Majority system it is required that each candidate must be nominated by a party or needs backing of at least 1000 electors unless he/she is member of outgoing legislature (“Georgia” 2012).

In the most recent Georgian parliamentary elections, only two parties were able to obtain seats. The “Georgian Dream” party received 44 party list seats and 41 constituency seats, gathering 85 seats and 54.97 percent of the vote. The United National Movement Party received 33 party list seats and 32 constituency seats for a total of 65 seats, 40.34 percent of the vote.  The effective number of parties from the party list view is 1.96 and from the constituency view it is 1.97. It is safe to say that there are 2 effective parties in this electoral system. This coincides with the data since only two parties gained any seats in parliament. In fact, those same two parties were the only political parties who passed the 5-percent threshold.

                So does Georgia as a case study support the claims proposed by Duverger’s law? It seems to be a draw since 77 of the seats are determined by proportional representation and 73 of the seats are determined in single seat constituencies. The electoral system of Georgia seems to produce an arrangement of two large effective parties, which according to Duverger should be the result of a single member district plurality rather than a proportional representation. Nonetheless, Georgia seems to include both. What do we conclude from this data? There is something very interesting to take into account here. The Georgian Dream Coalition, the political party which earned the largest portion of votes, is actually comprised of 6 political parties of diverse ideological orientations ranging from pro-market and pro-western liberals to radical nationalists ("Georgian Dream" 2012).  So we see that the Georgian electoral system is partially a Single Member District Plurality System accounting for their only being 2 effective parties, but it is also partially a proportional system. In this certain case, it fits Duverger’s law since the largest participating party includes participants from numerous political ideologies. This concept in Duverger’s law is spoken of as “allowing more effective parties”, but in our case the system accounts for more participants in the effective parties.

                In this case study surrounding the Georgian electoral system, the evidence supports the claims of Duverger’s Law.

Wikipedia, "Elections in Georgia." Last modified 2012. Accessed October 31, 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Georgia.

Inter-Parliamentary Union, "Georgia." Last modified 2012. Accessed October 31, 2012. http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2119_B.htm.

W. Phillips Shively, Power and Choice, (New York City: The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2012), 230-236.

Wikipedia, "Georgian Dream." Last modified 2012. Accessed November 1, 2012.