The impact of election systems

Journal of Democracy

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 36-47

  Carey, John M ^a   Reynolds, Andrew ^b  

^a DARTMOUTH COLLEGE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 80054733943     PISSN: 10455736     EISSN: 10863214     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/jod.2011.0072     Document Type: Article

References (5)

1. Tarek Masoud, "Why Islam Wins: Electoral Ecologies and Economies of Political Islam in Contemporary Egypt," PhD diss., Yale University, 2009. Masoud explains that under Mubarak, the process of certifying candidates as workers or farmers was thoroughly corrupt. Many, if not most, "worker" or "farmer" candidates were in fact neither.
2. The date for elections was initially set for July, but in June was moved back to October. The reason given for the delay was administrative: The electoral commission needed more time to compile accurate voter rolls and provide all citizens with valid voter- identification cards.
3. For its 2010 parliamentary election, Jordan adapted its system so that candidates self-selected into what were, effectively, SMD-plurality contests in "virtual" subdistricts embedded within its existing SNTV districts. The virtual-subdistrict experiment was widely dismissed as inscrutable and untenable, even by the winning parliamentary candi- dates, and the point of greatest consensus among Jordanian reformers is that the virtual- subdistrict system will not survive.
4. The authors wish to thank Vladimir Pran for providing details regarding elections in the Palestinian Authority.
5. Authors' communication with Manuel Wally, EU and UN electoral mission advisor, and "Transition in Yemen: An Overview of Constitutional and Electoral Provisions," International Foundation for Electoral Systems briefing paper, 7 June 2011.