Ha’aretz 22/01/04

 Changes in Knesset Elections Will Lead to Broader Bases of Power and Smaller Numbers of Factions

Amidst the fevered-pitch of terrorist acts, military responses and political reproofs in Israel today, one of the few concrete certainties is that directing one’s attention to all other "secondary" matters – cultural, financial, or electoral – requires special effort. Nevertheless, viewed before the backdrop of an ailing democratic system whose effectiveness and public perception are eroding, it is clear we must make this effort to examine Israeli governance and create political change.

Even those who were convinced that the repeal of the direct elections for Prime Minister would rescue democracy in Israel, must ask themselves whether the election of Netanyahu, Barak, and Sharon resulted primarily from the system of direct election or whether it was this system that brought about the deterioration of the large parties and the weakening of government effectiveness. I, for one, am convinced that far more deep-seated developments in Israeli society led to these phenomena.

Although the direct election system for Prime Minister is now a thing of the past, currently, in the wake of this system’s repeal, we ought to renew the initiative to alter the Israel electoral system, from the national proportional system that exists today, to a mixed system, with combined regional and national elections. In the past, groups within the Knesset proposed a system in which 80 MKs would be elected from 20 districts, and 40 MKs would be elected through the current system.

Israel is the only democratic country in the world in which parliament is elected through national proportional elections. This system, in itself, is the real culprit responsible for impairing the stability of Israeli governments and granting representation to every trifling party and interest in the country. Since the start of the 1950’s, several proposals for electoral reform have been brought before the Knesset. The first proposal was advanced by David Ben-Gurion, and it recommended a shift to the British electoral model, in which every electoral district would elect one representative to Knesset. After that, the mixed system proposal – for integrated regional and national elections – was put forward by a group of Knesset members whom I led. The proposal passed the first and second readings in Knesset (bills brought before the Knesset must be voted on three times, or pass three readings, before becoming legislation) but thereafter the process was crippled by coalition pressures, primarily those of small factions on large parties in government.

In countries that use the regional-proportional electoral system, public interests and powers assemble into party blocs before parliamentary elections, the number of parties is relatively small and thus their representation in parliament is larger. In them, the public is aware of the alternatives lying before it, and can choose between distinct courses of action, genuinely influencing the manner in which the nation is led.

It is already sorely evident that the repeal of the direct election system alone has not brought about the desired concentration of political forces in the Israeli Knesset. Indeed, the current system of elections actually represents a catalyst for fictionalization. Accordingly, there is still significant need to employ a fundamental change within the Knesset electoral system that will finally bring about a unification of the primary parties in the country, minimize the number of sectarian interests in government, and create stable and effective governance. David Ben-Gurion, one of the most outspoken proponents of electoral reform, listed, while explaining his rationale for reform, the augmented capacity electoral reform could create in truly empowering governments to make decision and carry them out in action, while, at the same time, establishing a coherent opposition representing a true alternative to the government policy of the day.

Perhaps Israel’s political situation today, in which a broad-based collation is in place, will provide the grounds on which electoral change will be sown. However, in order to do so, a group of determined Knesset members from various and, very possibly, rival interests must find the will to see beyond their party lines and lead an electoral reform initiative for the well-being of the state, if not for their respective parties. I know that many Knesset members support the call for reform, and likewise it is apparent that in the Israeli public at large a majority would support such an initiative. I am convinced that this change is essential for the rehabilitation of democracy in Israel and the revivification of its representative and decision-making capacities. This initiative also has within it the power to draw concerned and capable individuals who are involved in their communities and want to make a difference on the entire country’s behalf. Such people are critically needed today, as oxygen is for life, especially in light of the decline of political leadership in Israel and the deterioration of Israeli governance. Not despite, but because of the severity of Israel’s national security situation and its need for political decisiveness, we must act, and act now, to save Israeli democracy from itself.