September 12, 2012 there will be elections for the House of Representatives. Voters then vote for a party, but what happens next? This is an opaque phase in the Dutch electoral system; politicians negotiate with each other in ‘back rooms’ and the voter waits until white smoke comes out of the chimney. According to the G500, a group of young people who want to influence party politics, this process is not transparent. That’s why they introduced the Stembreker on August 18, 2012. With this tool the voter can indicate which coalition he or she wants. Many think it is a great initiative, but there are also critics.
How does the Stembreaker work?
The voter can divide his vote among multiple parties with the Vote Breaker. Voters therefore do not give one vote, but parts of a vote to different parties of their preference. The Stembreker adds all these parts together and then the total number of parts is divided among the people who have registered via the Stembreker.nl website. On election day, all participants receive a text message with binding voting advice.
Calculation example from the Stembreker.nl site
Six people divide their votes.
- Person 1 votes: 50% VVD, 50% CDA
- Person 2 votes: 20% CDA, 30% D66, 50% SP
- Person 3 votes: 20% VVD, 50% D66, 30% SP
- Person 4 votes: 30% CDA, 20% D66, 20% GL, 30% PvdD
- Person 5 votes: 80% GL, 20% SP
- Person 6 votes: 70% PvdD, 30% VVD
On September 12, they will receive a text message with their voting advice.
- Person 1 votes: CDA
- Person 2 votes: SP
- Person 3 votes: VVD
- Person 4 votes: D66
- Person 5 votes: GL
- Person 6 votes: PvdD
If everyone follows the voting advice, all preferences are covered, according to G500 leader Sywert van Lienden. On August 18, Stembreker was launched at Lowlands. It was not without reason that this place was chosen. Young people are voting less and less. As many as 1.2 million people under the age of 40 will no longer vote. The G500 expects to attract younger non-voters to the polls again with the Vote Breaker.
Critical voices
After the initial positive reactions, there is also more and more criticism. Voters could abuse the system, there is no guarantee that everyone will adhere to the voting advice. Moreover, you do not know whether people complete the Vote Breaker with the desired intentions. With the right strategy, groups with a certain party preference can benefit from the Vote Breaker.
Others say that the system favors middle parties because they can merge with more parties and are therefore more likely to form coalitions. According to critics , this effect is reinforced by the Stembreker. Moreover, there are opponents who believe in principle that voters should choose a party, because according to them, the Vote Breaker means that the voter does not have to make a real choice.
Complicated
The initiators of Stembreker also expect that the tool will make coalition negotiations easier. After all, through the Stembreker, the voter has made a clear choice for a coalition. But this advantage also appears not to be undisputed. A calculation of the example from the site Stembreker.nl presents new problems: Suppose that the six indicated parties (VVD, CDA, D66, PvdD, SP, GL) are the only ones that appear and they each attract the same number of Stembreker voters? In this situation, the six parties with the Stembreker would each get 25 seats. A coalition must have 76 seats, so four parties would be sufficient. But, which four? And who supplies the prime minister? It’s still complicated and certainly not easier.