There are three main types of electoral systems:

§ majoritarian;

§ proportional;

§ mixed.

Majoritarian electoral system

Under the conditions of the majoritarian system (from the French majorite - majority), the candidate who receives the majority of votes wins. Majority can be absolute (if a candidate receives more than half of the votes) and relative (if one candidate receives more votes than another). The disadvantage of the majoritarian system is that it can reduce the chances of small parties to gain representation in government.

The majoritarian system means that in order to be elected, a candidate or party must receive a majority of the votes of the voters of the district or the whole country, while those who have collected a minority of votes do not receive mandates. Majority electoral systems are divided into absolute majority systems, which are more commonly used in presidential elections and in which the winner must receive more than half of the votes (minimum - 50% of the votes plus one vote), and relative majority systems (UK, Canada, USA, France, Japan and etc.), when it is necessary to get ahead of other contenders to win. When applying the absolute majority principle, if no candidate receives more than half of the votes, a second round of elections is held, in which the two candidates who receive the largest number of votes are presented (sometimes all candidates who receive more than the minimum number of votes in the first round are admitted to the second round). ).

proportional electoral system

The proportional electoral system means voting of voters according to party lists. After the election, each of the parties receives a number of mandates proportional to the percentage of votes gained (for example, a party that receives 25% of the votes gets 1/4 of the seats). In parliamentary elections, there is usually a percentage barrier (electoral threshold) that a party must overcome in order to get their candidates into parliament; as a result, small parties that do not have broad social support do not receive mandates. The votes for the parties that did not overcome the threshold are distributed among the parties that won the elections. A proportional system is possible only in multi-mandate constituencies, i.e. where several deputies are elected and the voter votes for each of them personally.

The essence of the proportional system is the distribution of mandates in proportion to the number of votes received by parties or electoral coalitions. The main advantage of this system is the representation of parties in elected bodies in accordance with their real popularity among voters, which makes it possible to more fully express the interests of all groups of society, to intensify the participation of citizens in elections and politics in general. In order to overcome the excessive party fragmentation of the composition of parliament, to limit the possibility of representatives of radical or even extremist forces penetrating into it, many countries use protective barriers, or thresholds that establish the minimum number of votes necessary to obtain deputy mandates. Usually it ranges from 2 (Denmark) to 5% (Germany) of all votes cast. Parties that do not collect the required minimum of votes do not receive a single mandate.

Mixed electoral system

Currently, many countries use mixed systems that combine elements of the majoritarian and proportional electoral systems. Thus, in Germany, one half of the deputies of the Bundestag is elected according to the majoritarian system of relative majority, the second - according to the proportional system. A similar system was used in Russia in the elections to the State Duma in 1993 and 1995.

A mixed system involves a combination of majoritarian and proportional systems; for example, one part of the parliament is elected by a majoritarian system, and the second by a proportional one; in this case, the voter receives two ballots and casts one vote for the party list, and the second - for a specific candidate elected on a majoritarian basis.

14. The electoral system of Russia. Reform of the electoral system at the present stage .

The electoral system includes two main elements:

§ theoretical (suffrage);

§ practical (electoral process).

Suffrage is the right of citizens to directly participate in the formation of elected institutions of power, i.e. elect and be elected. Electoral law is also understood as the legal norms governing the procedure for granting citizens the right to participate in elections and the method of forming government bodies. The foundations of modern Russian electoral law are enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

The electoral process is a set of activities for the preparation and conduct of elections. It includes, on the one hand, the election campaigns of candidates, and on the other hand, the work of election commissions to form an elected body of power.

The electoral process has the following components:

§ appointment of elections;

§ organization of constituencies, districts, precincts;

§ formation of election commissions;

§ voter registration;

§ nomination and registration of candidates;

§ preparation of ballots and absentee ballots;

In the Russian Federation, the established electoral system regulates the procedure for holding elections for the head of state, deputies of the State Duma and regional authorities.

Candidate for the post President of the Russian Federation may be a citizen of Russia at least 35 years old, living in Russia for at least 10 years. A candidate cannot be a person who has a foreign citizenship or has a visible residence, an unexpunged and outstanding conviction. The same person cannot hold the office of the President of the Russian Federation for more than two terms in a row. The President is elected for six years on the basis of universal, equal and direct suffrage by secret ballot. Presidential elections are held on a majoritarian basis. The President is considered elected if in the first round of voting for one of the candidates the majority of voters who took part in the voting voted. If this does not happen, a second round is appointed, in which the two candidates who received the largest number of votes in the first round participate, and the one who received more votes of the voters who took part in the voting than the other registered candidate wins.

Deputy of the State Duma a citizen of the Russian Federation who has reached the age of 21 and has the right to participate in elections has been elected. 450 deputies are elected to the State Duma from party lists on a proportional basis. In order to overcome the electoral threshold and receive mandates, a party must gain a certain percentage of the votes. The term of office of the State Duma is five years.

Citizens of Russia also participate in elections to state bodies and elected positions in subjects of the Russian Federation. According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. the system of regional state authorities is established by the subjects of the Federation independently in accordance with the fundamentals of the constitutional order and the current legislation. The law establishes special days for voting in elections to state authorities of the constituent entities of the Federation and local governments - the second Sunday in March and the second Sunday in October.

Reform.

The electoral legislation of Russia is currently at the stage of reform. The reform of the regulatory framework of the electoral process, like any legislative reform, has significant consequences for the development of the entire system of Russian law.

1. The first stage of the reform was the renewal of the electoral legislation in 2002-2003.

The new version was adopted by the Federal Law of June 12, 2002 No. 67-FZ "On the Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in a Referendum of Citizens of the Russian Federation", Federal Law of December 20, 2002 No. 175-FZ "On the Elections of Deputies of the State Duma, the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation”, Federal Law of January 10, 2003 No. 19-FZ “On Elections of the President of the Russian Federation” 1 . The above acts introduced a number of significant changes in the electoral system of Russia.

2. In 2004, various authorities put forward new initiatives to reform the Russian electoral system.

At the federal level, elections to representative bodies of state power are now held according to a mixed system. However, the practice of elections in recent years has shown that the majority of candidates for the federal parliament are elected from political parties. In this regard, during the reform of the electoral legislation in 2005, a fully proportional system of elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation was introduced.

In our opinion, the introduction of a proportional electoral system at the level of the Federation is quite acceptable.

Another significant change in the Russian electoral system in 2005 was the change in the procedure for electing heads of regions. The heads of the subjects of the Russian Federation will be elected not directly by the population, but by the regional parliaments on the proposal of the President of the Russian Federation.

3. Today, the Russian state is making every effort to ensure the exercise of power by citizens and to optimize the electoral process in Russia. However, state efforts in this direction alone are clearly not enough. It seems that without real action by political parties, as well as citizens, the goals set can hardly be achieved. At the present stage of development of Russian statehood, a more active participation of the people in the exercise of state power, the formation and development of civil society are required. This will help ensure not only the effectiveness of electoral procedures, but will also positively influence the entire further development of Russia and its relations with other countries.

The concept of the electoral system

The electoral system is the procedure for electing bodies of state power, bodies of local self-government and their officials elected directly by citizens. In the Russian Federation, citizens elect the President of the Russian Federation, deputies of the State Duma, deputies of the legislative (representative) bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, senior officials (heads of the highest executive bodies) of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (elections to other state authorities are also possible), representative bodies of local self-government, elections are possible heads of municipalities, other bodies and officials of local self-government.

Electoral systems for elections to bodies of state power and local self-government (as well as elected officials) are established by federal laws, laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (and for elections to local self-government bodies - also by charters of municipalities) in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Federal Law "On Basic guarantees of electoral rights and the right to participate in a referendum of citizens of the Russian Federation”, constitutions (charters) of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

Types of electoral systems

Types of electoral systems: majoritarian, proportional and mixed.

In the modern world, there are two types of electoral systems - majoritarian and proportional. Each of these systems has its own varieties.

Majoritarian electoral system - a system of elections to a collegial body (parliament), in which candidates who receive the majority of votes in their constituency are considered elected. Depending on what kind of majority it is (relative, absolute or qualified), the system has varieties.

Under a qualified majority system, the law establishes a certain percentage of the vote that a candidate (list of candidates) must receive in order to be elected. This share is greater than the absolute majority, i.e. more than 50% plus one vote. If no one wins in the first round under the supermajority system, a second round follows, which is usually held one to two weeks later. In the second round, the two candidates with the highest number of votes compared to the others are usually put forward for a new vote under this system.

Under a plurality majoritarian system, to win an election, a candidate needs to win more votes than any of the other candidates, even if less than half of the voters voted for him. It is effective: the only case where there can be no result is when two or more candidates receive the same maximum number of votes. Such cases are quite rare, and the legislative resolution of the situation usually happens by lot. Such a system was used as the only one for the election of any chamber of parliament (or both chambers) by 43 states, including the United States and a number of member states of the British Commonwealth of Nations. The system (this applies to all varieties of the majoritarian system) can be applied both in single-member and multi-member constituencies.

The majoritarian system of relative majority is one of the least democratic electoral systems, the main disadvantages of which are: 1) a significant number of votes remain "thrown out" and are not taken into account in the distribution of mandates; 2) the picture of the real balance of political forces in the country is distorted: the party that received a minority of votes gets the majority of seats. The potential injustice inherent in this electoral system is more clearly manifested in conjunction with the special ways of slicing constituencies, called "electoral geometry" and "electoral geography".

The essence of "electoral geometry" is that it is necessary to divide constituencies in such a way that, while maintaining their formal equality, in advance to ensure the advantage of supporters of one of the parties in them, dispersing supporters of other parties in small numbers in different districts, and concentrating their maximum number in 1 --2 counties. In other words, the party that divides the electoral districts will try to cut them in such a way as to “drive” the maximum number of voters voting for the rival party into one or two districts, deliberately going to “lose” them, thereby ensuring win itself in other districts. Formally, the equality of districts is not violated, but in fact the results of the elections are predetermined. By allowing the formation of constituencies to another party, we will get the opposite result.

The legislation of a number of foreign countries (USA, France, Germany, Great Britain, Japan), like the Russian legislator, also proceeds from the fact that it is practically impossible to form absolutely equal constituencies, and therefore sets the maximum percentage (usually 25% or 33%) deviations of constituencies in terms of the number of voters from the average constituency in one direction or another. This is the basis for the application of "selective geography", referred to in the US as "gerrymandering".

The goal of "electoral geography" is to make the more conservative rural voter's vote more powerful than the urban voter's by creating more constituencies in rural areas with fewer voters than in cities. As a result, with an equal number of voters living in urban and rural areas, 2-3 times more constituencies can be formed in the latter.

The advantage of the majority system of the relative majority is that the voting is carried out in one round, since the winner is determined immediately. This greatly reduces the cost of elections.

Under an absolute majority system, the winner is the candidate who wins 50% plus 1 vote of all voters who participated in the voting. In the event that no candidate receives the required number of votes, a second round is appointed, in which the two candidates who won the largest number of votes in the first round take part. In the second round, the candidate with the relative majority of the votes becomes the winner. The advantage of this system in comparison with the system of relative majority is that candidates are considered elected who are supported by a valid majority of voters, even if this majority is one vote. But the same defect remains, which is the main one in the system of relative majority: the votes cast against the winning candidates disappear.

The majoritarian electoral system, both relative and absolute majority, does not imply elections on a purely party basis. Along with candidates nominated by political parties, independent candidates are also fighting for seats. And voters, voting in elections, often prefer this or that candidate not as a representative of a certain party, but as a credible politician.

A proportional electoral system is a procedure for determining the results of elections, in which mandates are distributed among the parties that nominated their candidates for a representative body in accordance with the number of votes they received.

The proportional electoral system is based on the principle of party representation. With such a system, parties put forward lists of candidates ranked by them, for which the voter is invited to vote.

The voter actually votes for a political party (an electoral bloc or a coalition of parties, if their creation is allowed by law), which, in his opinion, most adequately and consistently expresses and protects his interests in the political system. The mandates are distributed among the parties in proportion to the number of votes cast for them in percentage terms.

The seats in the representative body of power that a political party (electoral bloc) has received are occupied by candidates from the party list in accordance with the priority established by the party. For example, a party that received 20% of the votes in the parliamentary elections in a single nationwide 450-member constituency should receive 90 deputy mandates.

The first 90 candidates from the corresponding party list will receive them. Thus, a proportional electoral system is a system for the formation of elected bodies of power on the basis of party representation, in which deputy seats (mandates) in a representative body of power are distributed in accordance with the number of votes scored by parties in percentage terms. This system ensures adequate representation of political interests in elected bodies of power.

In a proportional electoral system, in contrast to the majoritarian system, the loss of votes of voters is minimal and is associated, most often, with the so-called "electoral barrier" - the minimum number of votes that a party must gain in elections in order to be eligible to participate in the distribution of mandates. The electoral threshold is established in order to restrict access to representative bodies of power for small, often marginal, non-influential parties. The votes that did not bring mandates to such parties are distributed (also proportionally) among the winning parties. Like the majoritarian, proportional electoral system has its own varieties. There are two types of proportional systems:

• - a proportional system with a single nationwide multi-member constituency, the number of mandates in which corresponds to the number of seats in the elected body of power: only national parties put forward their lists of candidates, voters vote for these lists throughout the country;
• - proportional electoral system with multi-member constituencies. political parties form lists of candidates for electoral districts, respectively, the deputy mandates "played out" in the district are distributed based on the influence of the party in this district.

There is also a mixed or majority-proportional system, which, however, is not a separate, independent type of electoral system, but is characterized by a mechanical unification, a parallel operation of the two main systems.

A mixed electoral system is a system for the formation of representative bodies of power, in which part of the deputies is elected on a personal basis in majoritarian districts, and the other part is elected on a party basis according to the proportional principle of representation. The voter gives one vote for a specific candidate running in this constituency, the other - for a political party.

Mixed electoral systems are usually distinguished by the nature of the relationship between the elements of the majoritarian and proportional systems used in them. On this basis, two types of mixed systems are distinguished:

• - a mixed unbound electoral system, in which the distribution of mandates by the majoritarian system does not depend in any way on the results of elections by the proportional system (the above examples are just examples of a mixed unbound electoral system);
• - a mixed tie electoral system, in which the distribution of seats according to the majoritarian system depends on the results of elections according to the proportional system. In this case, the candidates in the majoritarian districts are nominated by the political parties participating in the elections under the proportional system. The mandates received by the parties in the majoritarian districts are distributed depending on the results of the elections according to the proportional system.

The most important function of the electoral process is that such a significant political and legal factor for the authorities, for any state as legitimacy, is determined primarily by the results of the will of citizens during voting during the election period. It is elections that are an accurate indicator of the ideological and political likes and dislikes of the electorate.

Thus, it seems justified to define the essence of the electoral system, firstly, as a legally regulated set of rules, techniques and methods of political struggle for power that regulate the functioning of the mechanism for the formation of public authorities and local self-government. Secondly, the electoral system is a political mechanism through which political parties, movements and other subjects of the political process carry out in practice their function of fighting for the conquest or retention of state power. Thirdly, the electoral process and mechanism is a way to ensure the degree of legitimacy of power necessary for the implementation of the state's power.

In the modern world, there are two types of electoral systems - majoritarian and proportional.. Each of these systems has its own varieties.

It takes its name from the French word majorite (majority), and the very name of this type of system to a large extent clarifies its essence - the winner and, accordingly, the owner of the corresponding elective post becomes the participant in the election campaign who received the majority of votes. The majority electoral system exists in three versions:

• 1) the majority system of relative majority, when the candidate who managed to get more votes than any of his rivals is recognized as the winner;
• 2) the majority system of an absolute majority, in which more than half of the votes cast in elections must be won in order to win (the minimum number in this case is 50% of the votes plus 1 vote);
• 3) a majoritarian system of a mixed or combined type, in which to win in the first round it is necessary to gain an absolute majority of votes, and if this result cannot be achieved by any of the candidates, then the second round is held, in which not all candidates go, but only those two who took 1st and 11th places in the first round, and then in the second round, to win the elections, it is enough to get a relative majority of votes, that is, to get more votes than a competitor.

Under the majoritarian system, the votes cast are counted in single-mandate constituencies, each of which can only elect one candidate. The number of such single-mandate constituencies under the majoritarian system in parliamentary elections is equal to the constitutional number of deputy seats in parliament. During the elections of the President of the country, the whole country becomes such a single-mandate constituency.

The main advantages of the majority system include the following:

1. This is a universal system, since using it, you can elect both individual representatives (president, governor, mayor), and collective bodies of state power or local self-government (country parliament, city municipality).

2. Due to the fact that under the majority system, specific candidates are nominated and compete with each other. The voter can take into account not only his party affiliation (or lack thereof), political program, adherence to one or another ideological doctrine, but also take into account the personal qualities of the candidate: his professional suitability, reputation, compliance with the moral criteria and beliefs of the voter, etc.

3. In elections held according to the majoritarian system, representatives of small parties and even non-partisan independent candidates can really participate and win along with representatives of large political parties.

4. Representatives elected in single-member majoritarian districts receive a greater degree of independence from political parties and party leaders, since they receive a mandate directly from voters. This makes it possible to more correctly observe the principle of democracy, in accordance with which the source of power should be voters, and not party structures. Under a majoritarian system, the elected representative becomes much closer to his constituents, as they know who exactly they are voting for.

Of course, the majority electoral system, like any other human invention, is not ideal. Its merits are not realized automatically, but under “other things being equal” and to a very high degree of dependence on the “environment of application”, which is the political regime. So, for example, under the conditions of a totalitarian political regime, practically none of the advantages of this electoral system can be fully realized, since in this case it only functions as a mechanism for realizing the will of political power, and not of voters.

Among the objective shortcomings of the majority system, which, as it were, are inherent in it from the very beginning, the following are usually distinguished:.

Firstly, under the majoritarian electoral system, the votes of those voters who were cast for non-winning candidates “disappear” and are not converted into power, despite the fact that in the total amount of votes cast in the elections, it is precisely these “non-winning” votes that can make up a very significant part, and sometimes - not much less than the votes that determined the winner, or even exceeding it.

Secondly, the majoritarian system is rightly considered more expensive, financially costly due to the possible second round of voting, and due to the fact that instead of election campaigns of several parties, several thousand election campaigns of individual candidates are being held.

Thirdly, with a majoritarian system, due to the possible victory of independent candidates, as well as candidates of small parties, a much greater likelihood of the formation of too dispersed, poorly structured and therefore poorly managed authorities is created, the effectiveness of which is significantly reduced because of this. This shortcoming is especially typical for countries with a poorly structured party system and a large number of parties (the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine is a prime example)

Finally, opponents of the majoritarian system argue that it creates an opportunity for the growth of the role of financial sponsors, contrary to the constitutional rights of voters. Very often, local governments are accused of using " administrative resource”, i.e. in the support of the administration of certain candidates, parties, etc. Presidential elections in 2004 Ukraine has confirmed this.

The second type The electoral system is a proportional system. The name itself is largely able to clarify its essence: deputy mandates are distributed in direct proportion to the number of votes cast for a particular political party. The proportional system has a number of significant differences from the majority system described above. Under a proportional system, the counting of votes of voters is carried out not within the framework of a single-member constituency, but in multi-member constituencies..

Under a proportional electoral system, the main subjects of the electoral process are not individual candidates, but political parties, whose lists of candidates compete with each other in the struggle for votes. With a proportional voting system, there is only one round of elections, a kind of “passability barrier” is introduced, which usually amounts to 4-5 percent of the number of votes cast nationwide.

Smaller and less organized parties are most often unable to overcome this barrier and therefore cannot count on deputy seats. At the same time, the votes cast for these parties (and, accordingly, the deputy mandates behind these votes) are redistributed in favor of those parties that have managed to score a passing score and can count on deputy mandates. The lion's share of these "redistributed" votes goes to those parties that managed to get the largest amount of votes.

That is why the so-called “mass” (they are also centralized and ideological parties) are primarily interested in the proportional voting system, which focus not on the attractiveness of bright personalities, but on the mass support of their members and supporters, on the readiness of their electorate to vote not according to personified, but for ideological and political reasons.

Election according to party lists according to the proportional system usually requires much lower expenses, but “on the other hand” in this case, between the people’s representative (deputy) and the people (voters) themselves, a figure of a kind of political intermediary appears in the person of the party leader, with whose opinion the “listed” deputy is forced be considered to a much greater extent than an MP from a majoritarian constituency.

Mixed or majoritarian-proportional electoral system

There is also also mixed or majority-proportional system, which, however, does not represent a separate, independent type of electoral system, but is characterized by a mechanical unification, a parallel action of the two main systems. The functioning of such an electoral system is caused, as a rule, by a political compromise between parties that are mainly interested in a majoritarian system, and those parties that prefer a purely proportional system. In this case, the constitutionally designated number of parliamentary mandates is divided in a certain proportion (most often 11) between the majoritarian and proportional systems.

With this ratio, the number of single-member constituencies in the country is equal to half of the mandates in parliament, and the remaining half of the mandates are played according to the proportional system in one multi-member constituency. Each voter at the same time votes for a specific candidate in his single-mandate constituency, and for the list of one of the political parties in the national constituency. Such a system currently operates for elections, the State Duma of Russia and some parliaments of other countries. (Until 2005, a mixed system operated for the elections of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine).

Currently, there are at least four electoral systems in Russia, i.е. four ways to organize direct elections: the majority system of an absolute majority in two rounds (this is how we elect the President of the Russian Federation); the majority system of a relative majority (with it there is only one round), which is used in the elections of half of the deputies of the legislative bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and in some municipalities; a mixed electoral system (seats are divided in half between party lists and candidates in single-member constituencies) and a fully proportional system, which will be used for the State Duma elections under the 2005 law.

There is nothing original in this. This situation exists in many foreign countries, when different bodies are elected in different ways, including France, Brazil and some other countries.

Elections of the President of the Russian Federation are carried out according to the majority system. They are held in a single federal electoral district, which includes the entire territory of the Russian Federation. Voters residing outside the territory of the Russian Federation are considered to be assigned to a federal electoral district. Elections of the President of the Russian Federation are appointed by the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation.

Candidates for the post of President of the Russian Federation may be nominated by political parties that have the right to take part in elections, electoral blocs, as well as by way of self-nomination. A citizen of the Russian Federation may nominate his candidacy provided that his self-nomination is supported by a group of voters in the amount of at least 500 people who have a passive electoral right. A candidate nominated by way of self-nomination is obliged to collect in his support, and a political party, an electoral bloc - in support of the nomination of a candidate by a political party, an electoral bloc, respectively, at least two million signatures of voters. At the same time, one subject of the Russian Federation should have no more than 50 thousand signatures of voters whose place of residence is located on the territory of this subject of the Russian Federation. If the collection of signatures of voters is carried out among voters permanently residing outside the territory of the Russian Federation, the total number of these signatures cannot exceed 50,000. A political party whose federal list of candidates is admitted to the distribution of deputy mandates in the State Duma of the Russian Federation does not collect signatures of voters in support of the candidates nominated by them. In the event of early or repeated elections of the President of the Russian Federation, the number of signatures of voters is reduced by half.

The Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation is not elected, it is formed from representatives of the legislative and executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (respectively, two representatives from the region).

Elections of deputies of the State Duma The Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, since 2007, are held according to the proportional system. Elections of deputies to the State Duma of a new convocation are appointed by the President of the Russian Federation. 450 deputies are elected to the State Duma from a single federal constituency.

Deputies are elected in proportion to the number of votes cast for federal lists of candidates for deputies of the State Duma from political parties. Consequently, candidates for deputies of the State Duma are nominated as part of federal lists from political parties that, in accordance with the law, have the right to participate in elections. And such a right is granted only to federal parties registered in the prescribed manner no later than 1 year before the elections, and having their regional branches in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

At the same time, a political party has the right to nominate as part of the federal list of candidates citizens of the Russian Federation who are not members of this political party (but not more than half of the list). It is important to keep this in mind, since this provision of the electoral legislation is a prerequisite for ensuring, under the conditions of a proportional system, the passive electoral right of non-partisan citizens. Moreover, the law on the election of deputies of the State Duma contains an article stating that every citizen of the Russian Federation with a passive electoral right, no later than three days from the date of the official publication of the decision to call the election of deputies of the State Duma, has the right to apply to any a regional branch of any political party with a proposal to include him in the federal list of candidates put forward by that political party.

The federal list of candidates must be divided (in whole or in part) into regional groups of candidates corresponding to a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, a group of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, or a part of the territory of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation. The number of regional groups of candidates may not be less than one hundred. The regional part of the federal list of candidates must cover all subjects of the Russian Federation.

And no more than three candidates can be included in the federal part of the federal list of candidates. This new provision of the law on the election of deputies of the State Duma guarantees proportional representation in the State Duma of the Russian Federation not only according to the party principle, but also according to the territorial one, since the formation of the final list of deputies from a political party, if it is admitted in accordance with the results of the elections to the distribution of mandates, will be carried out taking into account how the regions voted for this party. If a party receives more votes in one region than in another, then accordingly from the first region a larger number of candidates from the regional list of the party will receive deputy mandates.

The nomination of a federal list of candidates must be supported by voters by entering their signatures on the signature lists (at least 200,000 signatures, with no more than 10,000 signatures per subject of the Russian Federation), or secured by an electoral deposit paid by a political party (6 million rubles). True, this provision does not apply to parties whose federal lists of candidates are admitted to the distribution of deputy mandates at the last, preceding elections of deputies to the State Duma. That is, parties already represented in the State Duma of the Russian Federation under a proportional system have the right not to collect signatures of voters and not to pay an electoral deposit for registering the federal list of candidates put forward by it.

If the federal list of candidates of the party that paid the electoral deposit received, as a result of voting, at least 4 percent of the votes of voters from the total number of voters who took part in the voting, or is admitted to the distribution of deputy mandates, the electoral deposit paid by the political party that nominated such a list shall be returned to the Central Electoral commission of the Russian Federation to the electoral fund of this political party no later than five days from the date of the official publication of the results of the election of deputies of the State Duma.

The heads of regions are appointed by the President of the Russian Federation nominating candidates to the legislative assemblies of the relevant subjects of the Russian Federation, which must approve them in office. According to the Federal Law On Amendments to the Federal Law "On the General Principles of Organization of Legislative (Representative) and Executive Bodies of State Power of the Subjects of the Russian Federation" and to the Federal Law "On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in a Referendum of Citizens of the Russian Federation, direct gubernatorial elections replaced by the approval of the heads of regions by local legislative assemblies on the proposal of the president. The candidacy of the head of the region is submitted by the president 35 days before the expiration of the term of office of the incumbent governor, and within 14 days the regional parliament must make its decision. If the legislative assembly rejects the proposed candidate twice, the president has the right to dissolve it.

A significant change in the electoral legislation of the Russian Federation is the exclusion of the column “against all” from the ballots, which, according to the idea of ​​the legislator, should lead Russian voters to a more active political position, to increase their responsibility for the fate of the country. However, the exclusion of this column largely limits the electoral opportunities of citizens. Voting against all candidates was a legal and fairly effective opportunity for citizens to show the political elite that if there is political activity (citizens participate in elections), they do not find forces in the political system that can represent their interests. With the exception of the “against all” column, the political elite will no longer receive such signals, or will receive them in a more radical form.

In modern Russia, various forces influence the formation of the electoral system. Among them there are those who sincerely hope to polish the democratic procedures for the formation of a truly representative government. However, there are many political forces that are trying to form an electoral system “for themselves”, guaranteeing their victory in any case. In this sense, it is not at all accidental. in electoral law There are many loopholes in Russia for unscrupulous participants in the electoral process. These, undoubtedly, include the use of the notorious “administrative resource”, the removal of principal rivals from the elections through the courts, sometimes for far-fetched reasons and immediately before the voting day, the “stuffing” of ballots for those who did not appear at the polling stations, outright fraud of the election results, etc. d. The result of the struggle for the formation of a new electoral system in Russia will largely be predetermined by the general direction of the changes now taking place in Russia.

In this sense, consideration of world experience, various schemes of the electoral process in various conditions, existing types of electoral systems, allows us to better understand the political processes taking place in Russia, assess the real representativeness of Russian political power, consciously and competently participate in the electoral process, and thereby maximum opportunities to influence the quality of the political system of their country, and, therefore, the quality of their own lives.

The main electoral systems are evaluated according to three criteria: 1) representativeness, that is, the ability to reflect the existing spectrum of political forces in parliament; 2) the simplicity of the election mechanism; 3) correctability of election results in case of disappointment of voters in deputies.

Historically, the first electoral system was majoritarian system, which is based on the principle of the majority (French majorite - majority): those candidates who receive the established majority of votes are considered elected. Depending on what kind of majority it is (relative, absolute or qualified), the system has varieties. Later in the work, I will consider these varieties in more detail.

Already at the dawn of the formation of the constitutional system, ideas began to be put forward proportional representation of political associations, at which the number of mandates received by such an association corresponds to the number of votes cast for its candidates. The practically proportional system was first used in Belgium in 1889. By the beginning of the twentieth century, there were 152 of its varieties. Now it exists in more than 60 countries.

mixed system involves a combination of elements of the majority and proportional systems in various variations. Its formation began in the post-war period, it was supposed to incorporate the positive characteristics of the majority and proportional systems.

majoritarian electoral system. Under a qualified majority system, the law establishes a certain percentage of the vote that a candidate (list of candidates) must receive in order to be elected.

This share is greater than the absolute majority, i.e. more than 50% plus one vote. If no one wins in the first round under the supermajority system, a second round follows, which is usually held one to two weeks later. In the second round, the two candidates with the highest number of votes compared to the others are usually put forward for a new vote under this system.

Under a plurality majoritarian system, to win an election, a candidate needs to win more votes than any of the other candidates, even if less than half of the voters voted for him.

It is effective: the only case where there can be no result is when two or more candidates receive the same maximum number of votes.

Such cases are quite rare, and the legislative resolution of the situation usually happens by lot. Such a system was used as the only one for the election of any chamber of parliament (or both chambers) by 43 states, including the United States and a number of member states of the British Commonwealth of Nations. The system (this applies to all varieties of the majoritarian system) can be applied both in single-member and multi-member constituencies.

The majority system of relative majority is one of the least democratic electoral systems, the main flaws of which are:

2) the picture of the real balance of political forces in the country is distorted: the party that received a minority of votes gets the majority of seats. The advantage of the majority system of the relative majority is that the voting is carried out in one round, since the winner is determined immediately. This greatly reduces the cost of elections. Under an absolute majority system, the winner is the candidate who wins 50% plus 1 vote of all voters who participated in the voting. In the event that no candidate receives the required number of votes, a second round is appointed, in which the two candidates who won the largest number of votes in the first round take part. In the second round, the candidate with the relative majority of the votes becomes the winner. The advantage of this system in comparison with the system of relative majority is that candidates are considered elected who are supported by a valid majority of voters, even if this majority is one vote. But the same defect remains, which is the main one in the system of relative majority: the votes cast against the winning candidates disappear. The majoritarian electoral system, both relative and absolute majority, does not imply elections on a purely party basis. Along with candidates nominated by political parties, independent candidates are also fighting for seats. And voters, voting in elections, often prefer this or that candidate not as a representative of a certain party, but as a credible politician.

proportional electoral system. This system involves the distribution of seats in parliament in accordance with the number (percentage of votes received in elections according to party lists in a single national constituency or in several large regional constituencies. This system is used, as a rule, in parliamentary elections (all of continental Western Europe, with the exception of France, half of the deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, etc.).

Seats are allocated either by the largest balance, or by the highest average, or on the basis of an electoral quota.

The electoral quota is calculated by dividing the total number of votes cast in the constituency by the number of seats to be allocated, i.e. determines the minimum number of votes that a party needs to win in order to receive one mandate.

According to the method of the largest remainder, undistributed seats are given to parties with the largest balances of votes.

The distribution of mandates according to the largest average method is somewhat more complicated, when the remaining mandates are distributed among the parties with the largest average. To calculate the average of each list, it is necessary to divide the number of votes cast for a party by the number of mandates received by it plus one.

The advantage of the proportional system is its representativeness, which ensures the most adequate representation of various parties in parliament and gives voters the opportunity to rank their choice. It provides feedback between the state and civil society, promotes the development of pluralism and a multi-party system.

At the same time, the system does not fully meet the criterion of simplicity, since it requires the average voter to be widely aware of the positions of the parties. It can also become a source of destabilization of society in the event of a change in the orientation of the party for which the voters voted, as well as as a result of an intra-party split after the elections.

The advantages of the proportional electoral system are realized with the established multi-party system. In the absence of such a system, this system can lead to the emergence of a fragmented deputy corps and frequent changes of governments, which will weaken the effectiveness of the democratic system.

Mixed electoral system. On the basis of a mixed electoral system, elections are held in Germany and Russia. In a number of countries, in order to combine the benefits of various systems and avoid their shortcomings, or at least significantly mitigate these shortcomings, mixed electoral systems are being created, in which elements of both majoritarian and proportional systems are somehow combined.

The essence of the mixed system is that part of the deputy corps is elected by the majority system, and part - by proportional representation. The voter gives one vote for a specific candidate running in this constituency, the other - for a political party.

In accordance with the mixed type of electoral system implemented in Russia, the country's supreme legislative body consists of: 225 deputies of the State Duma representing influential political forces; 176 deputies of the Federation Council - representatives from administrative-territorial units (2 from each subject).