Comparative Issues in Party and Election Finance: Volume 4 of the Research Studies by F. Leslie Seidle

Author:F. Leslie Seidle [Seidle, F. Leslie]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Public Policy, Elections, Comparative Politics, Political Parties, Political Science, Political Process, General
ISBN: 9781550021004
Google: HzcrwPrEpakC
Goodreads: 7152248
Publisher: Dundurn Press
Published: 1991-01-01T00:00:00+00:00

All contributions and party dues received by the parties for the year are multiplied by 40 percent, the result of which is assumed to be the value of the tax expenditure of the federal government. This sum is then divided by the number of votes received in the last national election. The party that has the highest index score becomes the standard against which the others are measured, and the “deficit” parties then receive equalization funds, thus following the constitutional principle of equality of opportunity among the parties. (Gunlicks 1988, 43)

An upper limit for campaign reimbursements also ensured that such transfers would not exceed income from other sources.

This legislation affects each party differently. Membership dues and contributions are an important source of income for the Social Democrats and Christian Democrats, the major parties. Public funding is, however, absolutely crucial for the Free Democratic Party (FDP) and the Grünen (Green Party), the two smaller parties. In 1987, 56 percent of the Grünen’s income was from public funds, while the figure for the FDP was 49 percent (Doublet 1990, 38).

One result of the public funding regime begun in the 1960s and its subsequent alteration was that the West German party system adapted relatively smoothly and quickly to the introduction of issues like feminism, ecology and new styles of politics. In part it was the monetary support mandated by the larger parties to their smaller competitors - under pressure from the Court, to be sure - that helped to account for this. Given the low threshold for recognition, the relatively generous funding and the hegemony of the principle of equal opportunity, the two largest parties were never able to monopolize the representational terrain. They also had to face, in the Grünen, a new party that challenged the very discourse of postwar politics and, coming out of the New Left, particularly threatened the constituency of the Social Democrats. They also had had to face the Free Democrats, who gained new-found autonomy with public funding and in 1966 could risk abandoning their Christian Democratic alliance partner. In this way, the two major parties incurred costs for their “generosity,” but they refused to be completely short-sighted and self-interested in the reform process.

An additional result was that the energy that fuelled the protests of the 1960s and also led to the downfall of the German Democratic Republic in 1989-90 was relatively quickly translated into partisan politics in the FRG. Consequential debates about Germany’s future continued to be channelled into the party system and conflict shaped by electoral contests. Despite the intensity of conflict over such political and geographical restructuring, the well-being of the party system is not an issue. “The new forms of participation, the further development of pluralism, and the increased competition of ideas make it a democracy governed essentially by parliamentary parties yet more responsive to extraparliamentary forces” (Schoomaker 1988, 49). Levels of popular satisfaction with the ways in which West German democracy functioned were highest among the six countries of the European Community in the years 1973-86 (Ingelhart 1990, fig.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.