DOCSLIB.ORG

The Parliamentary Electoral System in Denmark

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Parliamentary Electoral System in Denmark The Parliamentary Electoral System in Denmark GUIDE TO THE DANISH ELECTORAL SYSTEM 00 Contents 1 Contents Preface ....................................................................................................................................................................................................3 1. The Parliamentary Electoral System in Denmark ..................................................................................................4 1.1. Electoral Districts and Local Distribution of Seats ......................................................................................................4 1.2. The Electoral System Step by Step ..................................................................................................................................6 1.2.1. Step One: Allocating Constituency Seats ......................................................................................................................6 1.2.2. Step Two: Determining of Passing the Threshold .......................................................................................................7 1.2.3. Step Three: Allocating Compensatory Seats to Parties ...........................................................................................7 1.2.4. Step Four: Allocating Compensatory Seats to Provinces .........................................................................................8 1.2.5. Step Five: Allocating Compensatory Seats to Constituencies ...............................................................................8 1.2.6. Step Six: Candidate Selection ............................................................................................................................................9 1.3. Some Effects of the Electoral System .........................................................................................................................10 1.4. The Electoral System in a Historical and Future Perspective ...............................................................................11 2. The Election Administration System ........................................................................................................................13 2.1. The National Level ...............................................................................................................................................................13 2.2. The Multi-member Constituency Level ........................................................................................................................13 2.3. The Nomination District Level ..........................................................................................................................................13 2.4. The Municipality Level ........................................................................................................................................................14 2.5. The Polling District Level ....................................................................................................................................................14 3. Administrative Procedures Preceding an Election .............................................................................................15 3.1. Administrative Districts and Electoral Districts .........................................................................................................15 3.2. The Electorate ......................................................................................................................................................................15 3.3. The Announcement ............................................................................................................................................................18 3.4. Parties and Candidates ......................................................................................................................................................18 3.4.1. The National Level ...............................................................................................................................................................18 3.4.2. The Multi-member Constituency Level ........................................................................................................................19 3.4.3. The Nomination District Level ..........................................................................................................................................21 3.5. The Campaign .......................................................................................................................................................................21 3.6. Public Financial Support for Political Parties ...............................................................................................................22 4. Polling and Counting.........................................................................................................................................................23 4.1. Polling on Election Day .......................................................................................................................................................23 4.1.1. Practical Preparations for Polling ...................................................................................................................................23 4.1.2. Polling Supervisors and Appointed Electors ..............................................................................................................23 4.1.3. Polling .......................................................................................................................................................................................23 4.2. Advance Voting ....................................................................................................................................................................24 4.2.1. Advance Voting in Denmark .............................................................................................................................................24 4.2.2. Advance Voting Abroad .....................................................................................................................................................25 4.2.3. Voting Material for Advance Voting ...............................................................................................................................25 4.2.4. Procedures for Advance Voting ......................................................................................................................................26 4.2.5. Examination of Advance Votes .......................................................................................................................................26 4.3. Counting ..................................................................................................................................................................................27 4.3.1. Preliminary Count .................................................................................................................................................................27 4.3.2. The Final Count .....................................................................................................................................................................28 The Parliamentary Electoral System in Denmark 2 5. Administrative Procedures Following an Election ..............................................................................................29 5.1. The Central Computations ...............................................................................................................................................29 5.2. Election Complaints ............................................................................................................................................................30 5.3. The Approval Procedure ....................................................................................................................................................30 5.4. The Publication of Election Results ...............................................................................................................................30 5.5. Destruction of the Voting Material and Payment of the Bill .................................................................................31 6. Computerization .................................................................................................................................................................32 6.1. Electronic computation of election results ................................................................................................................32 6.2. Electronic electoral registers and electronic logbooks ..........................................................................................32 6.3. E-voting ...................................................................................................................................................................................32 7. Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................................34 Annex ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 35 Extract of ballot paper from the general election in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Generalization of the Minisum and Minimax Voting Methods
    A Generalization of the Minisum and Minimax Voting Methods Shankar N. Sivarajan Undergraduate, Department of Physics Indian Institute of Science Bangalore 560 012, India [email protected] Faculty Advisor: Prof. Y. Narahari Deparment of Computer Science and Automation Revised Version: December 4, 2017 Abstract In this paper, we propose a family of approval voting-schemes for electing committees based on the preferences of voters. In our schemes, we calcu- late the vector of distances of the possible committees from each of the ballots and, for a given p-norm, choose the one that minimizes the magni- tude of the distance vector under that norm. The minisum and minimax methods suggested by previous authors and analyzed extensively in the literature naturally appear as special cases corresponding to p = 1 and p = 1; respectively. Supported by examples, we suggest that using a small value of p; such as 2 or 3, provides a good compromise between the minisum and minimax voting methods with regard to the weightage given to approvals and disapprovals. For large but finite p; our method reduces to finding the committee that covers the maximum number of voters, and this is far superior to the minimax method which is prone to ties. We also discuss extensions of our methods to ternary voting. 1 Introduction In this paper, we consider the problem of selecting a committee of k members out of n candidates based on preferences expressed by m voters. The most common way of conducting this election is to allow each voter to select his favorite candidate and vote for him/her, and we select the k candidates with the most number of votes.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Copenhagen Associate Professor in Political Science
    Declining Danish EU skepticism Kosiara-Pedersen, Karina Published in: Euroflections. Leading academics on the European elections 2019 Publication date: 2019 Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Citation for published version (APA): Kosiara-Pedersen, K. (2019). Declining Danish EU skepticism. In N. Bolin, K. Falasca, M. Grusell, & L. Nord (Eds.), Euroflections. Leading academics on the European elections 2019 (pp. 75). Mittuniversitetet. Download date: 25. sep.. 2021 Editors: Niklas Bolin Kajsa Falasca Marie Grusell Lars Nord Leading academics on the European elections 2019 1 DEMICOM-report nr 40 Read the electronic version of Euroflections at www.euroflections.se Editors Niklas Bolin Kajsa Falasca Marie Grusell Lars Nord Publisher Mittuniversitetet, Demicom, Sundsvall, Sverige Holmgatan 10 851 70 Sundsvall Contact 010-142 80 00 [email protected] www.facebook.com/mittuniversitetet www.twitter.com/mittuni www.instagram.com/mittuniversitetet Design and layout Accidens Kommunikation ISBN: 978-91-88527-70-7 This is Euroflections Euroflections is an academic report on the European elections 2019. With Euroflections we want to provide the public with interesting reflections on the election campaigns and their main actors, namely the voters, the parties and the media. In total, more than 70 experts in political science and political communication representing almost every EU country offer insightful analyses of campaign developments and electoral outcomes. Some contributions are one-country studies, while others are written from comparative or thematic perspectives. Euroflections is intended to fill a gap in European elections reporting and research. The report is not as fast as news media analyses and social media comments published immediately when the electoral outcome is known.
    [Show full text]
  • Are Condorcet and Minimax Voting Systems the Best?1
    1 Are Condorcet and Minimax Voting Systems the Best?1 Richard B. Darlington Cornell University Abstract For decades, the minimax voting system was well known to experts on voting systems, but was not widely considered to be one of the best systems. But in recent years, two important experts, Nicolaus Tideman and Andrew Myers, have both recognized minimax as one of the best systems. I agree with that. This paper presents my own reasons for preferring minimax. The paper explicitly discusses about 20 systems. Comments invited. [email protected] Copyright Richard B. Darlington May be distributed free for non-commercial purposes Keywords Voting system Condorcet Minimax 1. Many thanks to Nicolaus Tideman, Andrew Myers, Sharon Weinberg, Eduardo Marchena, my wife Betsy Darlington, and my daughter Lois Darlington, all of whom contributed many valuable suggestions. 2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction and summary 3 2. The variety of voting systems 4 3. Some electoral criteria violated by minimax’s competitors 6 Monotonicity 7 Strategic voting 7 Completeness 7 Simplicity 8 Ease of voting 8 Resistance to vote-splitting and spoiling 8 Straddling 8 Condorcet consistency (CC) 8 4. Dismissing eight criteria violated by minimax 9 4.1 The absolute loser, Condorcet loser, and preference inversion criteria 9 4.2 Three anti-manipulation criteria 10 4.3 SCC/IIA 11 4.4 Multiple districts 12 5. Simulation studies on voting systems 13 5.1. Why our computer simulations use spatial models of voter behavior 13 5.2 Four computer simulations 15 5.2.1 Features and purposes of the studies 15 5.2.2 Further description of the studies 16 5.2.3 Results and discussion 18 6.
    [Show full text]
  • The Other Voting Right: Protecting Every Citizen's Vote by Safeguarding the Integrity of the Ballot Box
    YALE LAW & POLICY REVIEW The Other Voting Right: Protecting Every Citizen's Vote by Safeguarding the Integrity of the Ballot Box . Kenneth Blackwell* and Kenneth A. Klukowski* INTRODUCTION There is a saying that "people get the government they vote for." The impli- cation of the maxim is that if undesirable or unwise legislation is enacted, if ex- ecutive branch officials are inept or ineffective, or if the government is beset with widespread corruption, then such unfortunate results are the consequence of the electorate's decision regarding whom to trust with the powers and pres- tige of public office. The Constitution does not forbid people from enacting wrongheaded policies. If voters elect leaders that fail them, then the citizenry is saddled with the consequences of its choice until the next election. Such is the reality in a democratic republic. But this argument begs the question of whether voters did in fact elect the individuals who take their oaths of office. How do citizens know which candi- date actually won in any given election? Election results are legitimate only to the extent that the returns include every legal vote-and only those legal votes-undiluted by fraudulent or otherwise unacceptable votes. The task of counting every legal ballot and excluding every unlawful one is the challenge faced by practitioners of election law, whether as lawyers or as election officials. Primary authority for elections in America rests with the states, and in each ju- risdiction the secretary of state is the senior executive officer responsible for en- suring a free and fair election.
    [Show full text]
  • Bilag 1: Kodning
    Bilag 1: Kodning Artikel Forfatter Medie Dato Gruppe Udtaler sig Professorer: Lavere kontanthjælp vil sende unge i uddannelse Casper Dall Information 07.08.12 Incitament Lars Barfoed (K) Morten Skjoldager, Kenneth Lund, Oliver Bærentsen, Flere unge ryger på kontanthjælp Jesper Hvass Politiken 18.01.13 pastoral Mette Frederiksen (S) Minister vil skrue bissen på over for Henrik unge på kontanthjælp Dannemand Berlingske 16.01.12 pastoral Mette Frederiksen (S) Morten Skjoldager, Kenneth Lund, Regeringen: Flere unge skal fra Oliver Bærentsen, Nadeem Faroq (R), kontanthjælp til SU Jesper Hvass Politiken 18.01.13 X Jesper Jespersen (SF) Annette Bonde, Magrethe Vestager (R), Unge skal glemme alt om kontanthjælp Peter Burhøi Berlingske 25.02.13 X Mette Frederiksen (S) Mie Raatz, Interview: Det er blevet et livsvilkår, at Tanja Astrup man er på kontanthjælp Parker Politiken 15.12.13 Pastoral Mette Frederiksen (S) Chris Kjær Jessen, Ulla Tørnæs (V), Unge får råd til mere på kontanthjælp Carl Emil Arnfred Berlingske 30.08.12 X Mette Frederiksen (S) Tusindvis af unge barberes i Sanne Rubinke (SF), kontanthjælp Jesper Vangkilde Politiken 24.02.13 X Sofie Carlsen Nielsen (R) mfl. Chris Kjær Jessen, Jesper Thobo- Ulla Tørnæs (V), Vil halvere dagpenge for unge Carlsen BT 16.02.12 Incitament Leif Lahn Jensen (S) Unge på kontanthjælp: Danskerne vil Mette Frederiksen (S) tvinge unge i arbejdstøjet Ritzau Information 18.02.12 X Bent Bøgsted (DF) mfl. Minister: Usundt at tjene på Carl Emil Arnfred, Berlingske 30.08.12 Disciplin, Nadeem Faroq (R), kontanthjælp Chris Kjær Jessen incitament Ulla Tørnæs (V) mfl. Rekordmange uuddannede unge på Rasmus Bøttcher Ulla Tørnæs (V), kontanthjælp Christensen Politiken 21.12.11 X Mai Henriksen (K) mfl.
    [Show full text]
  • 26. Møde Hasteforespørgsel Nr
    Fredag den 27. november 2020 (D) 1 Martin Geertsen (V), Liselott Blixt (DF), Per Larsen (KF), Lars Boje Mathiesen (NB) og Henrik Dahl (LA): 26. møde Hasteforespørgsel nr. F 25 (Om en ny epidemilov med udgangspunkt Fredag den 27. november 2020 kl. 10.00 i folkestyre, retssikkerhed og transparens) (Vil ministeren redegøre for, hvordan ministeren vil sikre en hurtig behandling og vedtagelse af en ny epidemilov med udgangspunkt i folkestyre, retssikkerhed og Dagsorden transparens?)). 1) 1. behandling af lovforslag nr. L 100: Titlen på den anmeldte sag vil fremgå af www.folketingstidende.dk Forslag til lov om ændring af lov om tilgængelighed af offentlige (jf. ovenfor). organers websteder og mobilapplikationer. (Justering af undtagelse for tredjepartsindhold på offentlige organers websteder og mobilap‐ Socialdemokratiets folketingsgruppe har meddelt mig, at medlem plikationer). af Folketinget hr. Leif Lahn Jensen er udpeget som medlem af Løn‐ Af finansministeren (Nicolai Wammen). ningsrådet i stedet for medlem af Folketinget hr. Flemming Møller (Fremsættelse 12.11.2020). Mortensen for den resterende del af indeværende funktionsperiode. Den pågældende er herefter valgt. 2) 1. behandling af lovforslag nr. L 108: Forslag til lov om ændring af lov om offentlige betalinger m.v. Socialdemokratiets folketingsgruppe har meddelt mig, at den til (Nemkontosystemet stilles til rådighed for grønlandske myndighe‐ Danmarks Nationalbanks Repræsentantskab har udpeget medlem der). af Folketinget hr. Christian Rabjerg Madsen som medlem for den Af finansministeren (Nicolai Wammen). resterende del af indeværende funktionsperiode i stedet for medlem (Fremsættelse 19.11.2020). af Folketinget hr. Flemming Møller Mortensen. Den pågældende er herefter valgt. 3) Forhandling om redegørelse nr. R 9: Sundheds- og ældreministerens redegørelse om ældreområdet 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Trade and Investment Factsheets: Denmark
    Denmark This factsheet provides the latest statistics on trade and investment between the UK and Denmark. Date of release: 17 September 2021; Date of next planned release: 7 October 2021 Total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) between the UK and Denmark was £11.6 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2021, a decrease of 16.5% or £2.3 billion from the four quarters to the end of Q1 2020. Of this £11.6 billion: • Total UK exports to Denmark amounted to £5.5 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2021 (a decrease of 10.2% or £626 million compared to the four quarters to the end of Q1 2020); • Total UK imports from Denmark amounted to £6.1 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2021 (a decrease of 21.5% or £1.7 billion compared to the four quarters to the end of Q1 2020). Denmark was the UK’s 22nd largest trading partner in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2021 accounting for 1.0% of total UK trade.1 In 2019, the outward stock of foreign direct investment (FDI) from the UK in Denmark was £6.4 billion accounting for 0.4% of the total UK outward FDI stock. In 2019, the inward stock of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the UK from Denmark was £7.2 billion accounting for 0.5% of the total UK inward FDI stock.2 1 Trade data sourced from the latest ONS publication of UK total trade data.
    [Show full text]
  • Udkast Tillægsbetænkning Forslag Til Lov Om Ændring Af Sundhedsloven
    Sundheds- og Forebyggelsesudvalget 2011-12 L 110 Bilag 14 Offentligt Til lovforslag nr. L 110 Folketinget 2011-12 Tillægsbetænkning afgivet af Sundheds- og Forebyggelsesudvalget den 29. maj 2012 Udkast til Tillægsbetænkning over Forslag til lov om ændring af sundhedsloven og lov om Det Etiske Råd (Digital ansøgning om tilskud til lægemidler, organisatorisk ændring af embedslægeinstitutionerne, nedlæggelse af Det Nationale Forebyggelsesråd samt ændring af sekretariatet for Det Etiske Råd) [af ministeren for sundhed og forebyggelse (Pia Olsen Dyhr, fg. )] 1. Udvalgsarbejdet 2. Indstillinger [og politiske bemærkninger] Lovforslaget blev fremsat den 14. marts 2012 og var til 1. <> behandling den 29. marts 2012. Lovforslaget blev efter 1. Inuit Ataqatigiit, Siumut, Sambandsflokkurin og behandling henvist til behandling i Sundheds- og Forebyg- Javnaðarflokkurin var på tidspunktet for betænkningens af- gelsesudvalget. Udvalget afgav betænkning den 15. maj givelse ikke repræsenteret med medlemmer i udvalget og 2012. Lovforslaget var til 2. behandling den 24. maj 2012, havde dermed ikke adgang til at komme med indstillinger hvorefter det blev henvist til fornyet behandling i Sundheds- eller politiske udtalelser i betænkningen. og Forebyggelsesudvalget. En oversigt over Folketingets sammensætning er optrykt i betænkningen. Møder Udvalget har, efter lovforslaget blev henvist til fornyet udvalgsbehandling, behandlet lovforslaget i 1 møde. Annette Lind (S) Flemming Møller Mortensen (S) Julie Skovsby (S) fmd. Karen J. Klint (S) Sophie Hæstorp Andersen (S) Kirsten Brosbøl (S) Orla Hav (S) Camilla Hersom (RV) Sofie Carsten Nielsen (RV) Liv Holm Andersen (RV) Jonas Dahl (SF) Özlem Sara Cekic (SF) Anne Baastrup (SF) Stine Brix (EL) Per Clausen (EL) Hans Andersen (V) nfmd. Anne-Mette Winther Christiansen (V) Jane Heitmann (V) Sophie Løhde (V) Hans Christian Schmidt (V) Eyvind Vesselbo (V) Fatma Øktem (V) Liselott Blixt (DF) Jens Henrik Thulesen Dahl (DF) Peter Skaarup (DF) Mette Hjermind Dencker (DF) Joachim B.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Participation of National Minorities in the Danish-German Border Region
    Political Participation of National Minorities in the Danish-German Border Region A series of studies on two hard-to-identify populations in a role-model-region Dissertation zur Erlangung des Grades Doctor philosophiae (Dr. phil.) an der Fakultät Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Fachbereich Sozialwissenschaften der Universität Hamburg vorgelegt von Adrian Schaefer-Rolffs Hamburg, den 06.06.2016 Erstgutachter : Prof. Dr. Kai-Uwe Schnapp Zweitgutachterin : Prof. Dr. Tove Hansen Malloy Tag der Disputation : 26.09.2016 “Always the hard way. Nothing was ever handed to me. Always the hard way. You taught me truth, you gave me strength. I learned everything the hard way” (Nicholas Jett and Scott C. Vogel) Contents Contents Contents ............................................................................................. V List of tables ............................................................................................ IX List of figures .......................................................................................... XI Abbreviations ....................................................................................... XIII Acknowledgements ................................................................................ XV Part I. Introductory part ..................................... 1 1. Introduction ........................................................................................ 3 1.1. Positioning and reflexivity .................................................................... 7 1.2. Relevant literature
    [Show full text]
  • How to Choose a Political Party
    FastFACTS How to Choose a Political Party When you sign up to vote, you can join a political party. A political party is a group of people who share the same ideas about how the government should be run and what it should do. They work together to win elections. You can also choose not to join any of the political parties and still be a voter. There is no cost to join a party. How to choose a political party: • Choose a political party that has the same general views you do. For example, some political parties think that government should No Party Preference do more for people. Others feel that government should make it If you do not want to register easier for people to do things for themselves. with a political party (you • If you do not want to join a political party, mark that box on your want to be “independent” voter registration form. This is called “no party preference.” Know of any political party), mark that if you do, you may have limited choices for party candidates in “I do not want to register Presidential primary elections. with a political party” on the registration form. In • You can change your political party registration at any time. Just fill California, you can still out a new voter registration form and check a different party box. vote for any candidate in The deadline to change your party is 15 days before the election. a primary election, except If you are not registered with a political party and for Presidential candidates.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Rule-Of-Law.Pdf
    RULE OF LAW Analyze how landmark Supreme Court decisions maintain the rule of law and protect minorities. About These Resources Rule of law overview Opening questions Discussion questions Case Summaries Express Unpopular Views: Snyder v. Phelps (military funeral protests) Johnson v. Texas (flag burning) Participate in the Judicial Process: Batson v. Kentucky (race and jury selection) J.E.B. v. Alabama (gender and jury selection) Exercise Religious Practices: Church of the Lukumi-Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah (controversial religious practices) Wisconsin v. Yoder (compulsory education law and exercise of religion) Access to Education: Plyer v. Doe (immigrant children) Brown v. Board of Education (separate is not equal) Cooper v. Aaron (implementing desegregation) How to Use These Resources In Advance 1. Teachers/lawyers and students read the case summaries and questions. 2. Participants prepare presentations of the facts and summaries for selected cases in the classroom or courtroom. Examples of presentation methods include lectures, oral arguments, or debates. In the Classroom or Courtroom Teachers/lawyers, and/or judges facilitate the following activities: 1. Presentation: rule of law overview 2. Interactive warm-up: opening discussion 3. Teams of students present: case summaries and discussion questions 4. Wrap-up: questions for understanding Program Times: 50-minute class period; 90-minute courtroom program. Timing depends on the number of cases selected. Presentations maybe made by any combination of teachers, lawyers, and/or students and student teams, followed by the discussion questions included in the wrap-up. Preparation Times: Teachers/Lawyers/Judges: 30 minutes reading Students: 60-90 minutes reading and preparing presentations, depending on the number of cases and the method of presentation selected.
    [Show full text]