OT - Elections

[Honolulu Blue]

Hello, HB #2 here.

I was thinking about how some other countries have leaders who either read the tea leaves, find them favorable, and call for an election; or some other circumstance forces an election.

Here in the U.S., we have regularly scheduled elections mandated by our Constitution, and only a Constitutional amendment can cancel or change them (actually, there are a few other possibilities, but they're all too dire to think about).

I wonder how many other countries have regularly scheduled elections that happen on the same day every 2nd, 4th, or whatever year.

[MIJB#19]

We do...
Well, maybe the dates aren't set, but elections are every 4 years.
Unless the goverment is so terrible, like the latest one and then they are dumped after less then 100 days and reinstalled after a new election another 100 days later for the remaining 3 years.

[Ryan S]

In the UK the limit is 5 years, but the Prime Minister can call elections at any time before the 5 years is up.

In Scotland the limit is a strictly enforced 4 years, and the elections must fall within a three month period.

In the UK elections always take place on a Thursday.

[Honolulu Blue]

Thanks for the input, guys. Exactly what I was looking for. I'd still like to hear from the other 200 or so countries, though.

[SackAttack]

I think Japan has regular elections, but like the UK, the Prime Minister can dissolve the lower house (not sure about the upper house) and schedule new elections.

Not sure I like that idea, truthfully. If the PM can dissolve Parliament (or its equivalent), then doesn't it stand to reason that he'd only do that if he thought he had something to gain politically by doing so?

Like, for example, if Bush could dissolve the Senate, he'd likely have done so at the height of his approval ratings, when he was more likely to have the Republican party gain seats there.

I just don't see how that's good for political stability.

[Ryan S]

Originally posted by SackAttack
I think Japan has regular elections, but like the UK, the Prime Minister can dissolve the lower house (not sure about the upper house) and schedule new elections.

Not sure I like that idea, truthfully. If the PM can dissolve Parliament (or its equivalent), then doesn't it stand to reason that he'd only do that if he thought he had something to gain politically by doing so?

In the UK if the Prime Minister is doing well in the polls, or anticipates a drop in support in the future he wil call an earlier election, but if he is in a bad way he will stretch the term right to the limit.

The upper house in the UK (The House of Lords) is unelected, so it has less influence than upper houses in many other countries, and people don't really take much of an interest in what goes on there.

One significant difference between the office of British Prime Minister and US President is that your President is the head of state. The British equivalent would be the Queen. The Prime Minister is leader of the parliament. I guess the US equivalent might be the majority leader in the Senate.

[Critch]

Generally in the UK an election is called sometime in it's 5th year, before the limit of 5 years. It would be unusual for a prime minister to call an earlier election, say after 2 years, to try and gain politically. Normally the only time an election is called before the 4 years is if there has been a successful vote of no-confidence against the government.

A vote of no confidence gets through when a government has a narrow majority and either some of their members defect to another party, or resign or die causing a by-election which can reduce the already slim majority.

It's pretty rare, only happened twice in the 20th century, Ramsay MacDonald in the 20's and Jim Callaghan in the 70's (which resulted in Thatcher rising from hell to cast her evil shadow over the UK).

[Honolulu Blue]

Originally posted by Ryan S
The Prime Minister is leader of the parliment. I guess the US equivalent might be the majority leader in the Senate.

Well, technically, since the House of Representatives is considered the lower congressional branch here, the PM equivalent would be the Speaker of the House.

I'm enjoying this discussion and its various tangents, even if no one else is. Keep it up!

[Glengoyne]

Originally posted by SackAttack
I think Japan has regular elections, but like the UK, the Prime Minister can dissolve the lower house (not sure about the upper house) and schedule new elections.

Not sure I like that idea, truthfully. If the PM can dissolve Parliament (or its equivalent), then doesn't it stand to reason that he'd only do that if he thought he had something to gain politically by doing so?

Like, for example, if Bush could dissolve the Senate, he'd likely have done so at the height of his approval ratings, when he was more likely to have the Republican party gain seats there.

I just don't see how that's good for political stability.

From my limited knowledge

Parliament != stability

[rdo]

In Australia we have maximum 3 year terms, but the 3 years limit starts after the first post-election sitting of the house and elections don't have to be held for a while (110 days?) after the dissolution of the house so elections can be held more than 3 years apart.

The PM can call an election anytime he/she wants before the 3 year limit. Actually the governor-general calls the election but he/she usually does so at the PM's behest, with the extraordinary events surrounding the Whitlam dismissal being the only exception.

Some stats:

Avg time between elections 1901-present
All elections:
30.7 months
Double dissolution elections excluded:
32.5 months

Source: Australian Electoral Commission, Electoral Pocket Book, Canberra, 1999, pp. 66–71.