Italian Elections and Politics 2018: Yellow Tide

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I actually like the new draft of the electoral system. They did away with the insane 8% threshold, introduced a share of preferential voting and gender parity, and increased the immediate majority threshold to 40%, which is respectable.

Could you or somebody else please explain the new proposal in some detail?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think it's because they're sort of a Frankenstein of at least two different concepts for what an election should produce--'an election should produce an accurate representation of the votes cast' and 'an election should produce a stable governing majority for one political pole'. They just feel 'off' to people even though there's not really much objective reason to have a serious problem with them.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I actually like the new draft of the electoral system. They did away with the insane 8% threshold, introduced a share of preferential voting and gender parity, and increased the immediate majority threshold to 40%, which is respectable.

Could you or somebody else please explain the new proposal in some detail?

The voters cast their vote for a party list in a 5 or 6-member constituency. However, the votes are tallied at the national level. If the party that comes ahead has received more than 40% of the vote, this party gets 52% of the seats. The remaining 48% of seats is assigned proportionally to all the parties that have received more than 3% of the vote. If no party has cleared the 40% threshold, a runoff is held between the top two parties - and the winner takes the 52% seats bloc. Then among each parties seats are distributed between constituencies. Voters may express two individual preferences on the party list they have voted for (one for a man and one for a woman). The list leader selected by the party remains ahead no matter what, but the other candidates are ordered by the number of their preferences. Also, lists must alternated between genders, so that if the list leader is a man, the second must be a woman, and reciprocally.

That's...amazingly contorted and difficult to explain but I think I understand the reasoning behind it, and I'd say it's preferable to the other ideas that were being thrown around a while back. Thanks.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Antonio!

Another question: are the personal preferences counted at the constituency level or at the national level and then members are assigned to random constituencies (like how Berlusconi technically represented a constituency in Molise, I think, after 2006)?

I have no idea, but I would assume the former.

Good. The other way is [Inks]ing horrible.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Is there any chance of Pietro Grasso getting the gig full-time, and would anybody want him to?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Is there any chance of Pietro Grasso getting the gig full-time, and would anybody want him to?

Yeah, he's one of the second-tier candidates that I forgot to mention. He has good relationships both with Renzi and with the PD's left-wing, and Berlusconi surprisingly doesn't hate him either, so he might very well have a shot. But he's not talked about that much compared to the others.

He seems pretty good from what I've read about him. I'd certainly rather him than Prodi or, God forbid, Amato.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Italicum passed in the Senate: 184 Aye, 66 Nay, 2 abstaining, 63 absent.

Good, I guess.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Good, I guess.

What's going on with Senate reform? Is that part of Italicum or is it being put through separately?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

How'd the first ballot go?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Why is the right so against Mattarella? I was under the impression that he was strongly Catholic and more or less down-the-middle, and originally came from the center-left faction of DC. That seems like the profile of a basically conciliatory choice to me. Is the Berlusconist right simply not as friendly with the Catholic Church and Catholic politics as the Italian right traditionally has been? Because especially after the defection of NCD--which as I understand it includes the more Christian-democratic and social-conservative elements of the former PdL; is that accurate?--that wouldn't particularly surprise me. Does it have anything to do with the Vatican endorsing Monti in 2013? Or is it specific to Mattarella as a person?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Why is the right so against Mattarella? I was under the impression that he was strongly Catholic and more or less down-the-middle, and originally came from the center-left faction of DC. Is the Berlusconist right simply not as friendly with the Catholic Church and Catholic politics as the Italian right traditionally has been? Because especially after the defection of NCD--which as I understand it includes the more Christian-democratic and social-conservative elements of the former PdL; is that accurate?--that wouldn't particularly surprise me. Does it have anything to do with the Vatican endorsing Monti in 2013?

Mattarella actually has a bit of an history of clashes with Berlusconi. He resigned from the Andreotti government in 1990 when a law was passed which legalized the situation of Berlusconi's TV networks. He was also a big fan of Oscar Luigi Scalfaro, who regularly clashed with Berlusconi during his presidency. More secondarily, he drafted the famous "Mattarellum" electoral law, in place from 1994 to 2006, which Berlusconi's government repealed when it came to power.

The interesting aspect is that, historically, the left-wing of the DC where Mattarella comes from was probably one of the most anti-Berlusconi factions of the old First Republic (after the PCI/PDS wing). Berlusconi essentially aggregated the Craxi wing of the PSI (hence why he has good relationships with someone like Amato) and the DC's right. He's always seen the Catholic Left as a significant threat, as his hatred of someone like Prodi shows.

That's...completely unsurprising, really.

I'm still curious about my question regarding NCD.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I actually have high hopes for Italy now. It's been a long time since I've been able to say that.

Having said that...any chance at all of getting the Statute of Workers back?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I actually have high hopes for Italy now. It's been a long time since I've been able to say that.

Having said that...any chance at all of getting the Statute of Workers back?

I have a hard time seeing that. Even if his relationships with the PD's left-wing have improved a lot with this election, Renzi isn't the kind of person who backtrack easily. Maybe the decrees that will give a precise content to the Jobs Act will be a bit "softer" than expected. I guess he can bargain that with his party in exchange for a swift approval of the electoral reform.

I think that would be best for everyone both politically and as public policy, so let's hope something like that is what happens.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The other confidence motions were carried, and the final vote on the Italicum is set for Monday.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I've been impressed with Renzi's commitment to generally well-intentioned structural reforms and with his mastery of Italy's political process. I'm less fond of his anti-worker tendencies.

On to Senate reform?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Why, exactly, are things going so (relatively) badly for PD? What if anything has Renzi done to make himself unpopular?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

So Liguria's replaced Campania as the only region with an FI president?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I would actively support retaining direct election of senators. I think it's in general better than not to elect upper houses, provided they function as a revising chamber and have an at least slightly different electoral system than the lower house.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Also, if anyone's interested, I can do graphs comparing 2016 results in big cities with the previous elections. I might end up doing them even if nobody is interested, but any interest would provide additional motivation.

Please do!

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Is there any actual argument for 'No'? At all? Sincere question.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If Renzi wins the referendum, will he call a new election to try and get a friendly senate ASAP and gain a "mandate"?

Elections in the spring would be a real possibility.

But that's a pretty big if, since "No" is currently leading in all polls.
The consensus is that the race is at 48% vs 52%, with 15/20% still undecided.

Doesn't a ''No'' trigger an election too, given Renzi's resignation.

No is a leap in the dark. No one knows what Renzi will really do, and no one knows what happens if he resigns.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Did anybody ever consider leaving the Senate mostly as-is but removing the requirement that it give the Prime Minister confidence?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I assume there will be a caretaker government

It's still His Turn

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I used to hate the majority premium but now I think it's the least of several evils in a political culture like Italy's.