Dhe exceptional success of the CSU is largely based on its dual role in federal and state politics. In Bavaria it can act as the only party with federal political action, and in Berlin it can get a disproportionately large amount for the Free State. To this day, this is a nuisance for many, including in the sister party CDU. Just ask Wolfgang Schäuble.
However, the CSU’s business model is now being endangered by the traffic light government with its plans for electoral law reform – at least that’s how they see it in the CSU. Should the CSU not get over the five percent hurdle in the federal territory with its second vote result in Bavaria, it would no longer be represented in the Bundestag, even if it won each of the 46 direct mandates in the state. At least that’s what the traffic light government intends to do by deleting the basic mandate clause. This stipulates that a party gets into parliament according to its share of second votes, even if it has failed at the five percent hurdle.
The CSU is alarmed. The head of the CSU state group in the Bundestag, Alexander Dobrindt, told the FAZ: “We have never needed it: but you want to abolish the double network for the CSU and other parties.” From his point of view, that would have a massive impact on the entire Union: “If the CSU is not represented in the Bundestag, the CDU is no longer able to govern either.”
Merz and Dobrindt outraged
Dobrindt said he considered the traffic light project to be unconstitutional because a party that, according to direct mandates, is politically anchored in a region must be represented in the Bundestag. This emerges from a judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court in the 1990s. In addition, he considers the plans “to be maximally disrespectful and unfair in terms of democracy theory”. The traffic light let go of all respect in dealing with each other. This is a threat to democracy and will “have long-lasting consequences”. He tried very hard to reach an agreement in the conversation, but the traffic light was “animated by the idea of having found a model that only harms the opposition.”
The CDU chairman Friedrich Merz agreed with him in a joint press statement on Tuesday: The right to vote envisaged by the traffic light is “an electoral right directed against the Union”, it is aimed “specifically against the CSU”. Michael Frieser, legal advisor to the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, is of the opinion that a basic mandate clause can also be inserted under the “questionable capping system” that is now being sought. If a party has won three, four or five mandates directly, the elected representatives could move to the top of the list even with a result of less than five percent – and from this list candidates would then move into the Bundestag according to the second vote result.
Another interesting detail belongs to the astonishing genesis of the reform proposal: the impulse to abolish the basic mandate clause came from legal experts in the Union. In the hearing on the electoral law in early February, Stefanie Schmahl, a law teacher from Würzburg, said that it was “constitutionally doubtful” to leave the basic mandate clause in the new electoral law, that it was “unrelated to the system” and could not be “legally justified without contradiction”. The expert Philipp Austermann, who was also named by the Union, saw it in a similar way to Schmahl: In the new electoral law, “the basic mandate clause is no longer constitutionally tenable”.
It’s also about credibility
The lawyers have a point: under the new system, a victory in the constituency does not guarantee entry into the Bundestag. The party must also be entitled to the seat based on the result of the second votes. In fact, the basic mandate clause no longer really fits in with this, because it is based on the idea of classic direct mandates. Three constituency winners not only give themselves a mandate, but also other list candidates according to the share of second votes.
#Traffic #light #plan #vote #CSU