Solutions to the "mismatch problem" in elections

Modern politics is built on the foundations of democracy. Democracy can be achieved in many ways, but elections are an integral part of it. Election is not only the direct embodiment of democracy, but also the ultimate guarantee of democracy. However, human preferences are hidden, cannot be directly observed, and cannot be automatically adjusted according to the intentions of a particular individual or organization. This constitutes a possible contradiction between people's spontaneous voting results and the intentions of specific subjects. In order to solve this "mismatch problem", specific subjects need to take various measures to actively adjust people's spontaneous behavior. This article briefly describes these methods by taking Country X as an example.

According to the "Constitution" and "Election Law" of country X, the public opinion representatives at the grassroots level (cities not divided into districts, municipal districts, counties, autonomous counties, townships, ethnic townships, and towns) in country X are directly elected by the people, and the public opinion representatives above the grassroots level It is indirectly elected by grassroots public opinion representatives. Country X adopts a constituency system, and each constituency can produce one to three representatives. Interestingly, country X also adopts the voting rule of absolute majority system, "representative candidates can only be elected when they obtain more than half of the votes of the voters who participated in the voting or the electoral representatives". This ensures that elected representatives have a public opinion base that exceeds that of parliamentarians in mainstream democracies.

There are two ways to nominate representatives of public opinion X: "All political parties and people's organizations can jointly or individually recommend candidates for representatives. Voters or representatives, with more than ten people jointly signing their names, can also recommend candidates for representative." However, grassroots public opinion representatives Candidates should be "one-third to one-time more than the number of representatives to be elected", and public opinion representatives above the grassroots level should be "one-fifth to one-half more than the number of representatives to be elected." This provision is intended to guarantee differential elections. In addition, in order to ensure fair elections, the Election Law of Country X also stipulates that secret balloting should be set up in the electoral process, and there should be a secret ballot writing office. Public security administration punished or investigated for criminal responsibility.

It can be seen that if elections are conducted in a conventional manner, the "mismatch problem" between the elected representatives of country X and the needs of specific subjects may be serious. To avoid this problem, Country X has taken some measures that have proven to be very effective. These measures run through the election, including the selection of the election committee, the division of constituencies, the nomination of candidates, the election process, the voting process, and the election results.

First, the selection process of the Election Commission of Country X is firmly in the hands of a specific subject. The academic circle summarizes this mode as "the lower selects the upper" and "the old selects the new". The Standing Committee of the Parliament of Country X is a subordinate body that belongs to the Parliament in de jure. However, the Election Law of Country X stipulates that the standing committee of the parliament at or above the grassroots level presides over the election of representatives of the public opinion of the parliament at the same level, and appoints the election committee of the parliament at the same level - this is "selection from the bottom", and the lower structure of the parliament presides over the parliament. Election of public representatives. Since the new parliament has not been formed before the election, the electoral committee responsible for electing the new parliament can only be appointed by the standing committee of the previous parliament - this is "the old election". According to publicly available information, the chairman of the Election Committee is usually concurrently held by the chairman of the Standing Committee. Therefore, the operation of the Election Commission is actually under the control of a specific subject. It should be noted that grass-roots parliaments do not have standing committees. However, the Election Law stipulates that grass-roots election committees are appointed by the higher-level parliamentary standing committees and are under the leadership of the higher-level parliamentary standing committees.

In the process of constituency division, specific subjects in country X can take at least two methods to meet their needs. First, in accordance with the provisions of the "Election Law", constituencies are divided "by production units, public institutions and work units". In this way, a specific subject can ensure that representatives of public opinion will inevitably be generated in certain units. The second is to expand the capacity of constituencies, breaking through the legal requirement of one to three representatives of public opinion in a constituency, so as to arrange for the favorite people of specific subjects to serve as representatives of public opinion.

The candidate nomination process can also take various measures to reduce the "mismatch problem". The premise of a candidate being nominated is to pass the loyalty test of a specific subject in country X. According to the public official documents, the nomination process must adhere to the "leadership" of a specific subject, and the election of public opinion representatives "as an important work content for [specific subject] management of cadres and talents, and to strengthen [specific subject] leadership and gatekeeping." In addition, the official document expressly stipulates that "those who are politically questionable, misbehaving and morally corrupt" will not be nominated. According to the research results of some scholars, when the grassroots initially recommended candidates, sometimes the official seal was even the official seal of a specific subject, and it was only converted into the official seal of the election committee when the official representative was recommended later. In order to ensure that the public opinion representatives in the plan can be successfully elected, specific subjects often make full use of organizational resources to mobilize members to recommend candidates for representatives in the plan in the form of joint names of voters (below the county) or representatives (above the county). The nomination rate of these organizations is usually close to 100%. In Country X, there is also a unique system of "preparation" for candidates, that is, before the candidates are formally determined, the preliminary list of candidates is submitted to the representatives of public opinion in the current parliament for full consultation and discussion, so as to finalize the official list of candidates. According to statistics, the probability of candidates jointly nominated by voters being "incubated" and "negotiated" is much higher than that of candidates nominated by groups - of course, voters who jointly sign may still be people who meet the needs of specific subjects.

During the election process, Country X cannot allow free elections. Years ago, there were signs of competitive elections in cities B and S in country X, which greatly exacerbated the "mismatch problem." Since then, Country X has tightened the competitiveness of elections again by amending the law and other means. The Election Law of Country X stipulates, "According to the requirements of voters, the election committee shall organize representative candidates to meet with voters, and representative candidates shall introduce themselves and answer voters' questions. Introduce." In other words, candidates can communicate with voters only under the organization of the Election Commission. In fact, even if free elections are allowed, Country X's Electoral Law has set sufficient barriers for candidates who do not meet the needs of certain subjects. Candidates’ campaign funds must be “listed in the financial budget and expended by the state treasury”, “citizens participating in the election of deputies to people’s congresses at all levels shall not directly or indirectly accept any form of election-related funding provided by foreign institutions, organizations, or individuals. ". In addition to excluding candidates from the plan, specific subjects in Country X also ensured the election of candidates within the plan through vague "repeated emphasis" and "understanding of the masses".

In the voting process, although the law has stipulated that secret voting is required, at least in the past practice process, secret voting often cannot be realized. According to the observation of some scholars, the voting host often does not mention the secret ticket writing office, and in fact there is no secret ticket writing office. Because they didn't know the candidates, the voters seemed to be random when they actually voted. "Everyone stood next to each other, got the ballots, and immediately made a circle and crossed it. Within five minutes, hundreds of voters who were present were finished and left. ”. Objectively speaking, this phenomenon is in line with the needs of specific subjects in country X. Voters withdraw quickly after casting their ballots, making it impossible to verify the authenticity of the polling results. Of course, it remains to be seen how the current voting phenomenon is, and there may have been some substantial changes.

In addition to the above-mentioned precautionary measures, Country X also has the means to influence the election results. The most fundamental way is to require that someone must be voted for a representative, that is, "selection with a hat". During the implementation process, the electoral committee will assign candidates in the plan that meet the needs to a certain constituency. If they are elected, the election will be ended. If they are unsuccessful, the seats allocated by the constituency will be withdrawn and must not be occupied by other candidates. Such representatives of public opinion are called "hatted representatives". It can be understood in this way that the candidate came to this constituency wearing the hat of the representative of public opinion. If he is not elected, then he will also wear the hat of the representative of public opinion and go back. quota". "Representatives wearing hats" are mostly key personnel within a specific subject in country X, but the grassroots also exist.

A slightly more uncertain approach than cap elections is to set re-election quotas, even if a certain percentage of public representatives must be re-elected in advance. For example, the "Opinions on the Arrangement of Election Work" of City N expressly stipulates that "in order to maintain the continuity of the work of the [Parliament], no less than one-third of the representatives shall be re-elected." Country X also has a saying of "reserved places", that is, instead of allocating all the representative places to the corresponding constituencies, a number of places are reserved for later use. City W once issued a document on September 6, 2021, specifying that "44 places for the fourth municipal-level [parliamentary public opinion representative] of the city are reserved". Obviously, these quotas will lead to a reduction in the quota of normal public representatives in the constituency.

It should be said that it is very common for the "predictable prophet" of country X to stipulate the representation of public opinion. J City's public filing requirements on September 30, 2021, "the proportion of leading cadres serving as deputies to the National People's Congress should continue to be strictly controlled." In fact, the proportion of representatives of public opinion of each group is stipulated. As mentioned in the document issued by N city, "the representative structure of the people's congress at the county and township levels should generally be mastered with reference to the current proportion. At the county level: civil servants should not exceed 30%, no more than 10% of the person in charge of the enterprise, about 15% of professional and technical personnel, more than 15% of workers, more than 20% of farmers, and about 10% of representatives from other fields. Township level: no more than 20% of civil servants, The person in charge of the enterprise shall not exceed 3%, professional and technical personnel account for about 10%, workers account for about 5%, farmers account for more than 55%, and representatives from other aspects account for about 7%. Representatives of [specific members] in the county and township people's congresses are generally About 65%, and women representatives account for more than 25%." The provision that the proportion of members of a specific subject is about 65% has its own special meaning. The Constitution of Country X stipulates that amendments to the Constitution require the approval of two-thirds of the representatives of the parliament. Therefore, a guaranteed 65 percent representation in Congress will go a long way toward keeping the Constitution up to date. Of course, about 65% can only be understood as the minimum, not the maximum. Statistics show that in the last four congresses of country X, the proportion of public opinion representatives of specific subject members has exceeded 70%, which has exceeded the two-thirds requirement.

These measures of Country X have been proved to be effective in practice. The most obvious evidence is that the approval rate of certain bills in the X country's parliament is much higher than that of ordinary countries, often with only single-digit disapproval votes, or even no disapproval votes at all - this is a miracle in public decision-making. From the establishment of the election committee to the influence of the election results, the experience of country X in a comprehensive and systematic manner without leaving any dead ends provides sufficient reference for effectively solving the "mismatch problem", and also makes outstanding contributions to the development of voting theory. Due to the lack of data and the author's lack of knowledge and ability, the solution to the "mismatch problem" in country X involved in this article will inevitably be missed. I hope readers can supplement and correct it.