False failure

In parts of political science, the failure to accept a proposal in a direct democratic vote simply because a quorum has not been met is described as a spurious failure .

use

Political science use

In some parts of political science, the expression " false failure" is used for analytical delimitation, so that when investigating direct democratic processes, results and their causes as well as the effect of individual design regulations can be viewed in a more differentiated manner. If quorums are used in a direct democratic vote (for example an approval or participation quorum), a distinction is usually made in the presentation of voting results between:

• Successful submissions that both received the majority of votes and met the required quorum,
• falsely failed proposals that received a majority of the votes but did not meet the required quorum and
• failed submissions that did not receive a majority of the votes cast.

If no quorum is used in a direct democratic vote, the analytical classification, which has not been authentically failed , does not apply , since the votes cast are the only ones to decide whether a proposal is successful or not.

Use in the political dispute

In the political debate about the design of direct democratic procedures, the use of the expression spurious failure already implies a criticism of the design of the procedure, in particular the applicable voting quorums. Above all, critics of voting quorums want to emphasize by using the expression that a submission was not really rejected, but that the majority will do not come into effect solely because of the framework conditions set. The possibility of a bogus failure of a submission is seen as visible evidence of a deficient design of direct democratic procedures in which the democratic principle of majority voting is violated by setting up additional hurdles.

Proponents of voting quorums, on the other hand, do not see this democratic principle violated and therefore largely refrain from making a distinction between failed proposals and bogus failed proposals .

Application examples

If a participation quorum of 50% were to apply to a fictitious referendum , the submission to be voted would have failed if 90% of the voters were in favor of it, but only 49% of those entitled to vote took part in the vote itself. A real historical example of this is the referendum on the expropriation of princes in 1926, in which 92.9% voted for the bill, but only 39.3% of those entitled to vote took part. Thus, although a clear majority of those who voted voted in favor of the proposal, the required quorum of 50% participation was clearly missed, which was therefore a false failure and was not applied.

If a quorum of approval of 25% would apply to a fictitious referendum , the submission to be voted would have failed if 90% of the voters were in favor, but these approvals only make up 24% of the total number of those entitled to vote. A real example of this is the first referendum in Stendal at the beginning of 2013, in which a majority of 70.3% of those who voted spoke out in favor of preventing the establishment of a discount store as required in the bill, but only just under 11 due to the low participation in the vote , 2% of all those entitled to vote.

Referendum on the judicial structure reform in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania 2015
Quorum 33.3%
19.7%	4%
Yes	No
The percentages are based on the number of voters.

Another example is the referendum on the reform of the judicial structure in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania . Despite an approval of 83.2% of the votes cast, the referendum to withdraw the reform failed because the necessary third of all eligible voters did not agree. Justice Minister Uta-Maria Kuder commented on the result with the words “ People think the reform is right and important. They clearly showed this with their clear no, either in the form of absenteeism or in the vote.

literature

• Jens Kösters: The referendum in North Rhine-Westphalia. Political organization and legislation of the municipalities . LIT Verlag, Münster 2005, ISBN 978-3-8258-9125-1 , p. 64 f.
• Theo Schiller (Ed.): Direct Democracy in Theory and Communal Practice (= Studies on Democracy Research . Volume 2). Campus Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1999, ISBN 978-3-593-36322-6 , p. 141.

Individual evidence

1. ↑ In Stendal, the first referendum failed because of the quorum . In: Volksstimme , March 8, 2013. Retrieved November 6, 2013.
2. ↑ Referendum in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania failed. In: Legal Tribune Online. September 7, 2015, accessed October 5, 2015 .