Swiss Elections & Politics (Next election 2019)

[ZuWo]

If Austria is ready to pay for that, sure. Sounds like a good deal.

The newspaper "Sonntagsblick" has not only released a poll on the Gripen question but also published a survey on the minimum wage initiative. As expected, the left-wing proposal to establish a national minimum wage of 4000 Swiss Francs a month doesn't stand a chance.

[ZuWo]

gfs.bern has conducted another (probably the last) poll on the referenda of May 18.

As it turns out the two most competitive issues are the vote on the gripen fighter jets, where there is a clear right-left divide, and the initiative which seeks to establish a lifetime ban for convicted paedophiles from working with children and is mainly opposed from the left and the FDP.



Meanwhile, the minimum wage initiative is gradually losing support - only 30% of the respondents said that they would vote yes, while nearly two-thirds are against it.

Having understood that they need to convince more of their supporters to vote for the gripen fighter jets, the chairmen of the four main centrist/right-leaning parties SVP, FDP, BDP and CVP had a rare appearence together in Bern today. Most people may have already voted since about 90% of the voting population usually cast their ballots by mail so its questionable whether this will have much of an impact:



http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss_news/Fighter_jet_purchase_remains_up_in_the_air.html?cid=38521920

[ZuWo]

The voting period for the May 18 referenda ends in six days. Campaign posters can be found almost everywhere. Here are a couple of examples:

[ZuWo]

[ZuWo]

The people have spoken. The Swiss voters have rejected the Swedish Gripen fighter jets as well as a monthly federal minimum wage of 4000 Swiss Francs. At the same time, a bill concerning family doctors, which was hardly debated at all, and the initiative concerning pedophiles have both passed with very comfortable majorities:

Gripen:

1,344,959 yes - 1,542,875 no
46'6% - 53,4%
12 cantons for, 11 against

minimum wage:

687,743 yes - 2,209,249 no
23,7% - 76,3%
all 23 cantons against

federal bill on family doctors:

2,479,293 yes - 337,303 no
88% - 12%
all 23 cantons for

"lifetime ban on convicted paedophiles from working with children initiative":

1,819,211 yes - 1,045,110 no
63,5% - 36,5%
all 23 cantons for

Maps to follow

[Cassius]

Switzerland, on balance, continues to be one of the better countries in Europe politically speaking.

[Franzl]

Switzerland, on balance, continues to be one of the better countries in Europe politically speaking.

As long as you're a white, Swiss male....indeed

[ZuWo]

Switzerland, on balance, continues to be one of the better countries in Europe politically speaking.

I guess that's the view of a minority on the Atlas Forum.

Working at the local polling station was particularly interesting today. An official delegation from San Sebastian paid us a visit because they wanted to see how direct democracy works in Switzerland. They stayed for quite a long time, asked questions and took many pictures. A few years ago a parliamentary delegation from South Korea visited us, too.

[Franzl]

Switzerland, on balance, continues to be one of the better countries in Europe politically speaking.

I guess that's the view of a minority on the Atlas Forum.

Working at the local polling station was particularly interesting today. An official delegation from San Sebastian paid us a visit because they wanted to see how direct democracy works in Switzerland. They stayed for quite a long time, asked questions and took many pictures. A few years ago a parliamentary delegation from South Korea visited us, too.

Don't really understand that. What's different about the election administration, whether you're voting on ballot questions or for a parliamentary election?

[ZuWo]

Switzerland, on balance, continues to be one of the better countries in Europe politically speaking.

I guess that's the view of a minority on the Atlas Forum.

Working at the local polling station was particularly interesting today. An official delegation from San Sebastian paid us a visit because they wanted to see how direct democracy works in Switzerland. They stayed for quite a long time, asked questions and took many pictures. A few years ago a parliamentary delegation from South Korea visited us, too.

Don't really understand that. What's different about the election administration, whether you're voting on ballot questions or for a parliamentary election?

Having theoretical knowledge of a certain voting system and having first-hand insight into how referenda in a direct democracy work are two different things, I guess. Perhaps the Basques want to see whether that's a kind of system they should adopt once they are fully independent.

[Enno von Loewenstern]

Switzerland, on balance, continues to be one of the better countries in Europe politically speaking.

Not only of the better, but the best.

[Tender Branson]

Pretty much as expected ...

The minimum-wage never had a chance really.

The fighter jets are really a waste of money.

And the anti pedo-initiative was actually much "closer" than I thought (I thought the Swiss would vote in favour with 80-20 or so).

[ZuWo]

Detailed results and maps of the referenda can be found here.

The result of the Gripen vote is generally interpreted as a major defeat for minister of defence Ueli Maurer (SVP), who campaigned heavily for the fighter jets in all parts of the country. Maurer, the former SVP chairman and still a polarizing figure, is not very popular in the French-speaking region of Switzerland so this might partly explain why the proposal failed there by such a decisive margin. Indeed, if you look at the results by region you will see that there is - once again - a discernible gap between German and French Switzerland as a whole. As usual, the Italian-speaking region fits somewhere in between:

Switzerland

urban areas: 38% yes, 62% no
suburban areas: 47.9% yes, 52.1% no
isolated towns: 50% yes, 50% no
rural areas: 52.4% yes, 47.6% no

German-speaking part only

urban areas: 40.4% yes, 59.6% no
suburban areas: 51.9% yes, 48.1% no
isolated towns: 55.7% yes, 44.3% no
rural areas: 57.7% yes, 42.3% no

French-speaking part only

urban areas: 29.3% yes, 70.7% no
suburban areas: 34.3% yes, 65.7% no
isolated towns: 30.2% yes, 69.8% no
rural areas: 36.8% yes, 63.2% no

Italian-speaking part only

urban areas: 43.3% yes, 56.7% no
suburban areas: 45% yes, 55% no
isolated towns: no data - apparently there are no towns which match the relevant criteria
rural areas: 49.3% yes, 50.7% no

Speaking in very broad terms, we can conclude that the urban and French-speaking areas were victorious this time. However, a closer look at the results show that this narrative is probably too simplistic: the results in Western Switzerland (where people speak French), for instance, voted against the fighter jets in a fairly homogeneous way - the urban/rural divide was considerably smaller than in German Switzerland.

A pretty neat summary of what happened on Sunday:

[ZuWo]

Apart from the federal referenda there were a handful of important regional elections.

- Canton of Glarus: Election to the Swiss Council of States (akin to the US Senate - each canton has two seats)

Incumbent This Jenny (SVP) resigned for health reasons. Seven candidates were running for the vacant seat. None of the candidates managed to received a majority of the votes on the first ballot. The second ballot will be held on June 1.

1st ballot results:

Majority: 5,715 votes
------------------------------------------------------
Werner Hösli (SVP): 3'597 votes
Karl Stadler (Grüne): 1'813
Markus Landolt (independent): 1'531
Stefan Müller (CVP): 1'293
Franz Landolt (GLP): 1'182
Martin Leutenegger (FDP): 1'005
Hansjürg Rhyner (FDP): 633

http://www.gl.ch/xml_1/internet/de/intro.cfm

- Canton of Grisons: Cantonal Elections

Executive Election (5 seats)

Barbara Janom Steiner (BDP): 32'666 votes - ELECTED
Mario Cavigelli (CVP): 32'057 - ELECTED
Christian Rathgeb (FDP): 27'009 - ELECTED
Jon Domenic Parolini (BDP): 25'309 - ELECTED
Martin Jäger (SP): 22'575 - ELECTED
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Heinz Brand (SVP): 20'619
Jürg Kappeler (GLP): 9'218
 
Legislative Election

FDP: 32 seats (-6)
CVP: 31 (-2)
BDP: 27 (+1)
SP: 15 (+3)
SVP: 8 (+4)
GLP: 2 (0)
independents: 2 (0)

http://www.gr.ch/DE/Medien/Mitteilungen/MMStaka/2014/Seiten/2014051806.aspx
http://www.gr.ch/DE/Medien/Mitteilungen/MMStaka/2014/Seiten/2014051807.aspx

[ZuWo]

The people of Glarus elect one of their two Councillors of States (Ständerat) and a new cantonal parliament (called Landrat).

The three candidates running for the seat in the Council of States are Werner Hösli (SVP), Karl Stadler (Green Party) and Stefan Müller (CVP). Hösli received 3'597 votes on the first ballot while Stadler and Müller only got 1'813 and 1'293 votes. Therefore, anything but a victory for the SVP candidate would have to be considered a major surprise. If Hösli wins, this will be an SVP hold.

The election for cantonal parliament is probably going to be more interesting. The results of the previous election look as follows:

[ZuWo]

As usual Glarus counts very quickly. As expected, Werner Hösli has won the election, carrying each of the three voting districts:

Werner Hösli (SVP): 4'221 votes
Karl Stadler (GP): 2'294
Stefan Müller (CVP): 2'058

SVP hold

Results by voting districts

Glarus North:

Hösli: 1'371
Stadler: 976
Müller: 770

Glarus:

Hösli: 1'072
Stadler: 833
Müller: 617

Glarus South:

Hösli: 1'778
Stadler: 465
Müller: 691

As a consequence, the composition of the Swiss Council of States remains unchanged:



CVP - 13 seats
FDP - 11
SP - 11
SVP - 5
GP - 2
GLP - 2
BDP - 1
Independent - 1 (member of the SVP caucus)

http://www.gl.ch/documents/Ersatz_Staenderatswahlen_zweiter_Wahlgang_1_06_2014.pdf

[ZuWo]

The results of the election for cantonal parliament have been published. In short, things have remained extremely stable. If anything, it can be said that the left (SP+GP+GLP) has gained a single seat at the expense of the center (BDP+CVP):

SVP: 17 seats (no change)
FDP: 12 (no change)
BDP: 10 (-1)
SP: 8 (-1)
GP: 7 (no change)
CVP: 6 (no change)
GLP: 2 (+2 - did not contest the 2010 elections)

http://www.gl.ch/xml_1/internet/de/intro.cfm

[ZuWo]

A graph to highlight the federal figures Georg Ebner posted:

Result of the gfs.bern survey (federal election in October 2015)



I'd take these percentages with a grain of salt, though. While the survey shows that the SVP may lose and the SP gain a point or two, the cantonal elections which have been held since the last federal election actually suggest the opposite. Now it's fair to say that different factors are at play in cantonal and federal elections but that's something which shouldn't be ignored. (With the exception of the prognosticated FDP share the figures given for the other parties, however, seem plausible.)

As has always been the case in the past few election cycles the April 2015 legislative election in the canton of Zurich should be a pretty reliable indicator of where the national mood really is; in 2011, for example, all of the established parties lost ground in Zurich whereas the more recently formed parties, BDP and GLP, were successful. Indeed, this was also true for the federal result a few months later. 

[SNJ1985]

The SVP is divided about the ECOPOP-referendum, which aims to reduce immigration even further than the SVP-Ref. last February: Its delegates opposed it 298:80, but 63% of its members support it, 13 SVP-cantons say NO, but 5 YES.

What's the division based on?

[ZuWo]

The Ecopop initiative was launched by political activists with a green-left background. The main left-wing parties oppose it, but its main representatives are environmentalists, and their main arguments are of an ecological nature.

Interestingly, the initiative pursues two seemingly very different goals. Firstly, it says that the population of Switzerland may only grow by 0,2% each year. To put this in perspective, net immigration to Switzerland was around 87,000 last year, which is a growth rate of more than 1%.
Secondly, the initiative seeks to mandate that a tenth of Switzerland's expenditures on foreign aid (around CHF 150 million) shall be spent on family planning and birth control measures in third-world countries on an annual basis.

Under normal circumstances one would expect such a proposal to be rejected by the voters at the ballot box. However, this is already the second federal referendum dealing with the issue of immigration this year and everybody's panicking after the SVP's mass-immigration initiative won the support of a (very narrow) majority of the voters back in February.

As was pointed out by Georg Ebner, right-wing voters will be crucial in determining the outcome of the initiative. The SVP formally opposes Ecopop for two main reasons - the 0,2% cap is considered too restrictive and the birth control measures in third-world countries are regarded as none of Switzerland's business. Nevertheless, many SVP members and supporters who are still unhappy about the high immigration rates and believe the federal government is not actively trying to implement the SVP mass-immigration initiative feel tempted to vote yes.

The left is also split on the issue to a certain degree because the proponents of Ecopop almost exclusively cite ecological reasons to support them - reducing immigration and propagating birth control in poor countries help reduce carbon emissions both in Switzerland and on a global level, they claim. But the latter point is also why the initiative is heavily criticized by many left-wing politicians; they accuse the Ecopop proponents of being 'eco-fascists' as they essentially promote eugenics in places like Africa. 

As you can see, it's an ugly campaign. I'm convinced that the initiative will be quite firmly rejected at the end of the day, though.

[Tender Branson]

The Ecopop initiative was launched by political activists with a green-left background. The main left-wing parties oppose it, but its main representatives are environmentalists, and their main arguments are of an ecological nature.

Interestingly, the initiative pursues two seemingly very different goals. Firstly, it says that the population of Switzerland may only grow by 0,2% each year. To put this in perspective, net immigration to Switzerland was around 87,000 last year, which is a growth rate of more than 1%.
Secondly, the initiative seeks to mandate that a tenth of Switzerland's expenditures on foreign aid (around CHF 150 million) shall be spent on family planning and birth control measures in third-world countries on an annual basis.

Under normal circumstances one would expect such a proposal to be rejected by the voters at the ballot box. However, this is already the second federal referendum dealing with the issue of immigration this year and everybody's panicking after the SVP's mass-immigration initiative won the support of a (very narrow) majority of the voters back in February.

As was pointed out by Georg Ebner, right-wing voters will be crucial in determining the outcome of the initiative. The SVP formally opposes Ecopop for two main reasons - the 0,2% cap is considered too restrictive and the birth control measures in third-world countries are regarded as none of Switzerland's business. Nevertheless, many SVP members and supporters who are still unhappy about the high immigration rates and believe the federal government is not actively trying to implement the SVP mass-immigration initiative feel tempted to vote yes.

The left is also split on the issue to a certain degree because the proponents of Ecopop almost exclusively cite ecological reasons to support them - reducing immigration and propagating birth control in poor countries help reduce carbon emissions both in Switzerland and on a global level, they claim. But the latter point is also why the initiative is heavily criticized by many left-wing politicians; they accuse the Ecopop proponents of being 'eco-fascists' as they essentially promote eugenics in places like Africa. 

As you can see, it's an ugly campaign. I'm convinced that the initiative will be quite firmly rejected at the end of the day, though.

I'm a strong supporter of this measure then. Too few countries are investing in the crackdown of reckless human breeding in Africa and the Middle-East anyway, so Switzerland could set a good example to help reign in the population explosion in these regions. Long term, that's also good for Switzerland and the planet (less reckless population growth in Africa and the Middle East means less capitalism, more food security, less pollution, less environmental destruction, less conflict and less mass migration to Europe). I also like the 0.2% cap on immigration to Switzerland. Sounds like a good initiative.

[ZuWo]

I voted yes in the February immigration referendum but will vote against Ecopop; putting a 0,2% cap in our constitution seems way too rigid to me. Also, I'm not too keen on interfering in matters of family planning in other parts of the world.

I actually see where the left-wing critics of this idea are coming from whose caricature of this aspect of Ecopop basically boils down to "the Western world is responsible for the lion's share of the global carbon emissions so let's tell African parents 'hey, please don't have too many kids, overpopulation is bad for the environment'".

[Simfan34]

"reckless human breeding" Jesus I thought population fears died in the 80s.

Also criticising "you can't do what we did!" rhetoric is a left-wing criticism? Usually it is left-wingers who make it.

[politicus]

"reckless human breeding" Jesus I thought population fears died in the 80s.

Why? Human population will not peak before 2100 and resource depletion continues at full speed.

[SNJ1985]

I voted yes in the February immigration referendum but will vote against Ecopop; putting a 0,2% cap in our constitution seems way too rigid to me. Also, I'm not too keen on interfering in matters of family planning in other parts of the world.

I support the immigration cap, but not the birth control mandate. I would also vote No on this if I were Swiss.