• UGI USER
  • Oct 03, 2023
  • 9 Likes
  • 0 Comments

First-Past-The-Post Electoral System

Q. There are arguments that the current First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) electoral system must be replaced by the Proportional Representation (PR) electoral system in India. Critically evaluate the statement.

Approach

● Introduce by briefly explaining the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) and Proportional Representation (PR) electoral system.

● Give arguments in favor of PR system and FPTP system of election.

● Conclude accordingly.

Answer 

  • In the FPTP system, a candidate is elected to a state assembly or to the national parliament—in an election overseen by a competent authority—if that person receives even one popular vote more than the runner-up. It is argued that this system creates an anomaly because the interests of the majority of the electorate do not find expression and representation in the elected body.
  • It is currently being used to elect members of the House of Commons in the UK, both chambers of the US Congress and the lower houses in both Canada and India. As an alternative to the FPTP system, many experts have warranted for the Proportional Representation (PR) system for India.
  • The PR system seeks to create a representative body that reflects the overall distribution of public support for each political party. It is used in the elections of the President, the Vice President in India, Members of Rajya Sabha and Members of State Legislative Councils.

Arguments in favor of the PR system

  • Better representation: While the FPTP system tends to reward the strongest party disproportionately and, as a corollary, handicap weaker parties, the PR System seeks to overcome the disproportionalities that result from majority and plurality formulas, and to create a representative body that reflects the distribution of opinion within the electorate.
  • More scope for smaller parties: While the FPTP system reduces the opposition to the bare minimum, in the PR System representation happens in proportion to the votes a particular party gets. Thus, it provides scope for representation of smaller parties in the government.
  • Encourages party-based voting: While the FPTP system has been criticized to favor caste, religion, ethnicity and regional politics, the PR system enables a voter to overcome these factors and vote for a party rather than a candidate.

Arguments in favor of the FPTP system

  • Simplicity: While the PR system is a complicated method with one voter required to exercise at least two votes, it is comparatively very simple to vote in the FPTP system.
  • Voter Connect: In the PR system, the voter votes for the party which doesn’t allow voters to connect with the candidates. This connection is ensured in the FPTP system, where the voter is familiar with the candidate, he/she is voting for.
  • Stability: It has been generally observed that through the PR system, mostly coalition forms of government are formed, which tends to be less stable in comparison to majority governments, which have a higher probability of formation in the FPTP system, and which are more stable.

Therefore, both the systems have their own merits and demerits. Some other countries also offer an experience of a hybrid pattern combining elements of both these election systems.