Magic formula

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The magic formula is the name of the party-political composition of the seven-member Swiss Federal Council (government of the Swiss Confederation ), which came about in 1959, with a distribution ratio of 2: 2: 2: 1. The three parties with the greatest party strength received two, the fourth largest one seat. From this election onwards, the Federal Council consisted of two members each from the parties FDP , CVP (then KCV ) and SP, and one member from SVP (then BGB ). The composition of the Swiss Federal Council in this form lasted until 2003. Then one seat of the CVP changed to the SVP. The new composition of the 2: 2: 2: 1 formula lasted until 2008 and has been in effect again since 2015. The magic formula, which is supposed to represent proportional representation of all citizens, is a form of concordance government , which in turn is part of concordance democracy in Switzerland .

Origin of the term

In the discussions leading up to the 1959 elections, the new composition of the Federal Council was often simply called "formula" (e.g. in the National-Zeitung of November 20, 1959). It was only in the NZZ , which, as a FDP-related publication, the new formula, which meant a loss of seats for the FDP, was a thorn in the side, did NZZ editor-in-chief and FDP national councilor Willy Bretscher ironically call it “die” in the evening paper of November 26, 1959 Magic formula 2: 2: 2: 1 that has been sold around for years ». The word creation was taken up immediately, so on November 28th in Volksrecht and - even in the title - in the Landbote and on December 8th in Blick , the French equivalent «la formule magique 2-2-2-1» on December 1st in the La Suisse , the Italian “formula magica” on December 11th in the Gazzetta Ticinese . On December 3, the NZZ wrote that “the 'magical formula' of the Proporz Federal Council, which is about to be harvested, seems to have lost its attractive charm here and there”. From then on, it was only a small step to the term “magic formula”. Apparently the first to use it was another prominent opponent of the formula, the former President of the Conservative Christian Social Party Max Rohr , on December 4th in the Aargauer Volksblatt . Rohr's letter including the term “Zauberformel” was subsequently picked up by many other newspapers, first again by the NZZ on December 7th and 10th. On December 19, after the election, she announced the “victory of the 'magic formula'” in the title and thus finally established the term. The originator of the magic formula, Martin Rosenberg , General Secretary of the Conservative Christian Social People's Party, initially criticized the term; "The enabling of all forces willing to build up" could "hardly be described as" magic "". The term, which was meant ironically and derogatory by the opponents of the magic formula, lost this negative connotation over time, and Rosenberg used it himself later.

prehistory

1848-1890

From the founding of the federal state in 1848 to 1890, the radical-liberal party family occupied all seven Federal Council seats, this party family comprising currents from right to center to left and even then parliament made sure that everyone had a balanced role. After the Sonderbund War of 1847 , the radical liberals considered the Catholic-Conservative opposition to be obsessed with Rome , while the Social Democrats were considered internationalists . Both groups were therefore initially excluded from power in the state. Only the willingness for constructive cooperation declared in the parliamentary group's program of 1883, i. H. to turn away from the previously practiced fundamental opposition, opened the Catholic Conservatives the opportunity to participate in power in the Federal Council. In 1935 the Social Democrats had to remove the goal of dictatorship of the proletariat from their party program and commit to military national defense.

Note: The mandatory referendum has been in force since 1848 for all partial or total revisions of the Federal Constitution (BV). An optional referendum may be required by a number of voters or cantons with all federal laws and certain federal decrees since 1874th

1891-1942

In 1891 Freinn lost an important referendum vote on the then central question of rail nationalization, whereupon the liberal Emil Welti resigned and his party left the seat of the previous Catholic-conservative opposition. With the Lucerne National Councilor Josef Zemp , a Catholic conservative joined the Federal Council for the first time. As head of the railway department, he represented the policy of the entire Federal Council, although he was once an opponent of the nationalization policy.

1891, popular initiative

With the introduction of the popular initiative (for a partial revision of the constitution) at the federal level, state politics opened up to wider circles. In the 1830s, the cantons of Aargau, Basel-Landschaft, Thurgau, Schaffhausen, Lucerne and St. Gallen introduced the popular initiative, which was also incorporated into the Federal Constitution of 1848. From the 1860s onwards, the possibilities of initiatives (partial revision of the constitution, legislative initiative) spread in the cantons. A federal draft constitution, rejected in 1872, provided for the legislative initiative. After repeated corresponding demands and a "People's Initiative" submitted on August 3, 1880 , the Catholic Conservatives gave up their resistance in 1884 due to the experience gained with the referendum and so in 1891 the people's initiative for a partial revision of the constitution was introduced.

1919, proportional vote

In 1919, with the introduction of proportional voting rights for the National Council, the radical liberals lost an absolute majority in parliament. The Christian Democrats subsequently received a second seat with Jean-Marie Musy (as the successor to the resigned liberal Gustave Ador ). The Liberal Party was still the party with the largest number of voters (28.8%), the Social Democrats the second largest (23.5%) ; the Christian Democrats and the newly formed BGB came in at 21% and 15.3%, respectively. In 1928 the Social Democrats caught up with the Liberals (27.4%), in the following years they were the party with the largest number of voters until 1979 and again in 1995 (1983–1991 again the Liberals, from 1999 the SVP). In 1929, after the death of the liberal Federal Councilor Karl Scheurer , Rudolf Minger, the first representative of the BGB (later SVP) followed, with which the civic bloc government was formed to the exclusion of the Social Democrats (four radical liberals, two Christian Democrats, one BGB representative) .

1943-1950

The threat to the country from National Socialist Germany in the 1930s and 1940s led to a close association of all sections of the population. Above all, the social partnership between employers and employees prevailed, particularly impressively in the peace agreement of 1937 in the machine and metal industry. This development resulted in the election of the first Social Democrat, Ernst Nobs (then Zurich City President) after the resignation of the liberal Ernst Wetter . From then on, the Federal Council consisted of three radical liberals, two Christian Democrats, a representative of the BGB and a Social Democrat. Since the Christian Democratic faction was roughly as strong as the free-thinking group, the Christian Democrats were granted the post of Federal Chancellor as compensation .

Federal Council elections

Background - Federal Chancellor election 1951

In 1951 the Federal Chancellor had to be re-elected after the resignation of the Christian Democrat Oskar Leimgruber . The Christian Democrats, whose faction was now larger than the liberal, claimed the post as before as compensation for the third seat that was missing compared with the liberal, and ported an outside personality with the Thurgau chief judge Josef Plattner. The Liberals, on the other hand, insisted on the traditional policy of internal promotion and nominated Charles Oser . Although the BGB supported the Christian-Democratic candidacy (while the SP decided to allow votes), the liberal Oser was elected. The Christian Democrats felt arrogantly snubbed by the free-spirited senior partner and, in their anger, began to approach the Social Democrats. After the intermediate stage of 1954, this finally ushered in the establishment of the magic formula from 1959. The election of Federal Chancellor of 1951 was therefore more significant for the creation of the magic formula than is commonly assumed, and in retrospect, the implementation of its candidate appears to be a tactical mistake by the liberals.

1953

In 1953 the social democratic finance minister Max Weber resigned surprisingly after losing the vote; This was followed by the short episode of the voluntary retreat of the proportionally underrepresented Social Democrats into the "fountain of youth of the opposition" (Walther Bringolf). In the place of Weber, the liberal Hans Streuli was elected against the Christian Democratic candidate Emil Duft , which further increased the alienation of the Christian Democrats from the liberal. The social democratic motto for a return to the Federal Council remained "two seats or none" until 1959.

1954

The Federal Council elections of 1954 and 1959 are generally considered to be the masterpiece of the shrewd strategist and tactician Martin Rosenberg , Secretary General of the Christian Democrats and editor of the fatherland's parliament . He aimed for a composition of the Federal Council with two liberals, two Christian Democrats, two Social Democrats and a representative of the Civil Code. After the humiliations of 1951 and 1953, he wanted to break the overrepresentation of the liberals and achieve equality with them. Furthermore, it was clear to him that his party, as a junior partner, could exercise far less influence in a purely bourgeois government than in a Federal Council, in which it could be the majority funder for decisions between the blocs.

For this, however, a transitional solution was necessary - expressly declared by the party in an oral agreement with the Social Democrats in December 1954 - in which the Christian Democrats initially achieved parity with the Liberals with three Federal Councilors each. In 1954 the free-spirited vacancy required for the maneuver arose when Karl Kobelt and Rodolphe Rubattel had to be replaced (as well as the Christian Democrat Josef Escher , who died shortly before the Federal Council elections ); the multiple vacancies expanded the options (at that time the federal constitution still contained the provision that only one citizen from the same canton could be a member of the Federal Council). Rosenberg agreed in confidential negotiations with the Social Democrats not only to correct the liberal overrepresentation and to have a Christian Democrat elected instead of a liberal, but also the Social Democrats in his seat the next time a liberal resigned (it was expected that Max would resign in the foreseeable future Petitpierre , which then did not happen so quickly) and the newly won Christian Democrats. In the historic election session of December 14, 1954, the Ticino Christian Democrat Giuseppe Lepori was elected as the successor to Karl Kobelt against the free-thinking candidate Alfred Schaller from Basel with 128 of 232 valid votes. The Christian Democrats in the Federal Council had thus achieved a tie with the liberals (three liberals: Max Petitpierre, Hans Streuli and Paul Chaudet , who was elected as successor to Rodolphe Rubattel , three Christian Democrats: Philipp Etter, Thomas Holenstein , who was elected to succeed Josef Escher, and Giuseppe Lepori , a BGB representative: Markus Feldmann ).

1959

In order to be able to reward the Social Democrats at the next free-spirited vacancy, the Christian Democrat Philipp Etter , who had been in office since 1934, declared himself ready to the general secretariat of his party to resign immediately as soon as a liberal set a good example. In order to keep a free hand, Etter even renounced the vice presidency for 1956 (and thus the presidency for 1957). When the liberal Hans Streuli resigned after the National Council elections in 1959 , Etter also announced his resignation. A few days later, for health reasons, the two other Christian Democratic Federal Councilors Thomas Holenstein and Giuseppe Lepori also had to join the resignations; As in 1954, the options were expanded in a way that was favorable for the establishment of the magic formula.

In pursuing his goal of the magic formula "with relentless severity", Rosenberg also prevailed against party friends, namely against a group around the then party president Max Rohr. Like the Liberals, the latter wanted to grant the Social Democrats at most one - the third Christian Democratic - seat, which, however, would have destroyed the parity between the Christian Democrats and the Liberals, which was indispensable for Rosenberg, and which, given the Social Democrats' motto "two or none", was unrealistic anyway. Rohr, together with parliamentary group leader Josef Condrau, signed a letter of reply from the parliamentary group and party leadership to the Social Democrats on December 8, 1955, in which the oral agreement of December 1954 was confirmed. In an article in the Aargauer Volksblatt of December 4, 1959, he denied that rumors were true that there had been a more extensive agreement with the SP for a two-person representation of the Social Democrats following the transitional arrangement within the framework of the magic formula; Before the election, the Bundesrat parties had declared themselves ready to “allow the Social Democrats to re-enter the Bundesrat, but for the time being only to fill one seat”, and the Conservative People's Party had merely assured that it would give up the third seat it had won, “as soon as one better entitled party could lay claim to it ». Rosenberg countered this with the imprint in the fatherland of the letter co-signed by Rohr. This, however, does not speak of the magic formula, but of a Social Democratic participation in government "for the moment with one seat" supported by the Catholic Conservatives. Rohr's statements do not contradict the letter, but Rosenberg apparently wanted to point out that the phrase "for the moment" implied a two-person representation of the Social Democrats, which the Christian Democrats had already considered. Rohr's article in turn suggests that he was not involved in the confidential negotiations with the Social Democrats and was therefore angry.

The maneuver that was so carefully engineered for the December 17, 1959 election threatened to fail at the last moment when the Social Democrats, along with Willy Spühler , who was elected as Hans Streuli's successor in the first ballot , their party president Walther Bringolf as their official candidate for successor ported by Giuseppe Lepori . With his communist past, Bringolf was not eligible for the majority in parliament. The free-minded and later Federal Councilor Hans Schaffner, brought into play by the liberals and portrayed in a non-partisan way, was almost lifted into his chair back then - the BGB, which was also interested in not allowing a new superiority of liberalism to emerge, on the Christian-democratic one Line prevented it. Rosenberg knew how to circumnavigate this dangerous cliff. The Christian Democrats had already pointed out in their press release on December 7th, with regard to the expected, undesirable Bringolf candidacy, that their willingness to forego a seat "largely depends on which candidates the Social Democratic parliamentary group finally puts up". Accordingly, Rosenberg linked the offer to the Social Democrats for two seats with the condition that Bringolf waived. The Social Democrats played along by porting Bringolf, but dropped it in the hall. The unofficial candidate of the Social Democrats, the Basel Council of States Hans Peter Tschudi , asked parliament to support the official candidate Bringolf after the first ballot, which was inconclusive for the fourth seat, in which he voted 73 against Bringolf's 66 votes (Schaffner 84) the second ballot did not produce an absolute majority. Bringolf even cast only 34 votes (Tschudi 107, Schaffner 91), whereupon he ironically released the Social Democratic parliamentary group, which had partially let him down, of the "obligation" to vote for him. In the third ballot, which was decisive for the magic formula, the social democrat Hans Peter Tschudi was elected for conductors with 129 votes against 97. Rosenberg had thus achieved his goal; the magic formula was born, the two historical conflicts of exclusion in recent Swiss history, the cultural and class struggle, came to an institutional end to a certain extent. The state government now consisted of the two liberals Max Petitpierre and Paul Chaudet, the two Christian democrats Jean Bourgknecht (as successor to Philipp Etter) and Ludwig von Moos (as successor to Thomas Holenstein), the two social democrats Willy Spühler and Hans Peter Tschudi and the 1958 Friedrich Traugott Wahlen , BGB representative elected as successor to Markus Feldmann . Rosenberg justified the historical change in a statesmanlike manner, stating that “all political forces should be mobilized for the benefit of the country and people through a loyal and strength-based cooperation of the major parties”. But above all he had strengthened the power of his party with the magic formula; As a rule, a decision was no longer possible against the Christian Democrats.

2003

After the SVP had achieved large profits in the parliamentary elections in 1999 and 2003 and had become the party with the largest number of voters, it claimed a second seat in the state government. She demanded the election of Christoph Blocher , without whom she wanted to withdraw into the opposition . Blocher won the election against the incumbent Federal Councilor Ruth Metzler-Arnold (CVP).

The FDP, SP and SVP now occupied two seats each and the CVP one, which means that the composition again corresponded to the party strengths and still corresponded to the formula 2: 2: 2: 1, but according to the blocks (right, center, left) now the distribution 4 : 1: 2 instead of 3: 2: 2. It no longer contained a decisive element of the magic formula of 1959: that the middle can form majorities with the left or the right on a case-by-case basis. Some commentators therefore already date the end of the magic formula to this point in time.

2007 and split of the SVP

After the non-running Graubünden government councilor Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf was surprisingly elected to the Federal Council instead of Christoph Blocher in the 2007 Federal Council elections, the SVP announced that it would now pursue opposition policy. At the same time, Widmer-Schlumpf and the previous SVP Federal Councilor Samuel Schmid were excluded from the meetings of the SVP parliamentary group and thus non-attached as Federal Councilors, but (initially) remained party members of the SVP.

Until June 2008, the Federal Council continued to consist of two SP, FDP and SVP party members and one from the CVP, which means that the “arithmetic concordance” - depending on the point of view - could be described as formally maintained. However, the SVP did not regard its two Federal Councilors as their representatives and, since it was no longer represented in the Federal Council, proclaimed the end of Swiss policy of concordance.

After the SVP Graubünden split off from SVP Switzerland on June 16, 2008 by renaming it to BPS (later BDP) Graubünden , the Federal Council consisted for a short time of two SP and FDP party members as well as one each of the CVP, SVP and BDP, which ended the magic formula. A little later, the remaining SVP member Samuel Schmid joined the BDP. The SVP was no longer represented in the executive.

At that time, both the Greens , who were able to win votes in 2007 despite the splitting of the GLP , and the SVP demanded a seat in the Federal Council. In the middle, the CVP (through factional merger with EPP and GLP) and the FDP (through merger with the LPS ) experienced a consolidation. Following the split, the SVP's supporters fell from 29 to 23%, according to a first representative survey, with 4% migrating to the first three BDP cantonal parties and the rest to the FDP, CVP and GLP.

After Samuel Schmid announced his resignation from the Federal Council on December 31, 2008 on November 12, 2008, the 2008 Federal Council election was held on December 10 . Both the Greens and the SVP claimed the vacant seat. Finally, the SVP and Ueli Maurer managed to return to the Federal Council.

2011

In the Federal Council's renewal elections on December 14, 2011, the SVP tried to restore the magic formula and "arithmetic concordance" by standing up against the Federal Councilor of the BDP, Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf, with the candidates Hansjörg Walter and Jean-François Rime . However, this was only supported by the free-thinking group; The other large parliamentary groups, despite recognition of the SVP's claim, gave preference to another unwritten law of the Swiss political system: no Federal Council without need not to be re-elected. Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf was re-elected in the first ballot with 131 out of 239 votes. Another factor that played a role was the fact that if the seats were distributed according to blocks, the SVP / FDP, which is the right block, would not be entitled to an additional seat. It was further argued that the SVP should not be awarded a second seat in the Federal Council just now, when it had lost the most electorate of all Federal Council parties in the elections (–2.34%). She was also denied the right to a second seat because dealing with her candidate Bruno Zuppiger , who had to withdraw his candidacy because of a suspected affair, was "unworthy".

The party-political composition of the Federal Council thus still did not correspond to the magic formula.

2015

After Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf announced her resignation at the end of the year, there was a vacant seat in the general elections on December 9, 2015, to which the SVP claimed. The SVP competed with a three-way ticket consisting of Norman Gobbi , Guy Parmelin and Thomas Aeschi , who represented the three major language regions of Switzerland. Norman Gobbi was a member of the SVP parliamentary group, but joined the SVP before the elections. After the incumbent Federal Councilors were re-elected, Guy Parmelin prevailed in the third ballot with 138 votes, with an absolute majority of 119 votes.

This meant that the three largest parties in terms of voter share were again represented with two seats each.

2019

After the parliamentary elections in October , the Green Party became the fourth largest party in the National Council. Regula Rytz , the party leader of the Green Party, announced on November 21st that she was running for the Federal Council. The next day the Green parliamentary group nominated Rytz for the upcoming general renewal elections for the Federal Council . The attack particularly targeted Ignazio Cassis's ( FDP ) seat in the Federal Council , because a second seat of the FDP could no longer be justified, as the FDP only received 1.9% more votes than the Greens. Most parties found the Greens' claim to be justified, but the bourgeois parties (SVP, FDP and center parliamentary group) argued in favor of the stability of the Federal Council against voting out existing Federal Councilors. In addition, many saw Rytz as unsuitable for the Federal Council because she politicized too far left. Even the liberal sister party GLP decided to allow votes, so that ultimately only the SP supported the Greens' claim. The United Federal Assembly confirmed the seven previous incumbents on December 11, 2019 and thus fended off the attack by the Greens. Rytz lost to Cassis with 81 to 154 votes.

Federal Council and parties

Distribution of seats in the Federal Council since 1919

Distribution of seats in the Bundesrat.png

Development of party strengths since 1919

Shares of national council elections (in percent, rounded). Parties are listed that have reached at least 5% party strength once, all others are included in the others.

Political party 1919 1922 1925 1928 1931 1935 1939 1 1943 1947 1951 1955 1959 1963
FDP 28.8 28.3 27.8 27.4 26.9 23.7 20.7 22.5 23.0 24.0 23.3 23.7 23.9
CVP 21.0 20.9 20.9 21.4 21.4 20.3 17.0 20.8 21.2 22.5 23.2 23.3 23.4
SP 23.5 23.3 25.8 27.4 28.7 28.0 25.9 28.6 26.2 26.0 27.0 26.4 26.6
SVP 15.3 16.1 15.3 15.8 15.3 11.0 14.7 11.6 12.1 12.6 12.1 11.6 11.4
Zw'total 88.6 88.7 89.8 91.9 92.3 83.0 78.4 83.5 82.4 85.1 85.6 84.9 85.3
LdU * * * * * 4.1 7.1 5.5 4.4 5.1 5.5 5.5 5.0
PdA * 1.8 2.0 1.8 1.5 1.4 2.6 * 5.1 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.2
Rest 11.4 9.5 8.2 6.2 6.2 11.5 12.0 11.0 8.0 7.2 6.5 6.9 7.5
Political party 1967 1971 1975 1979 1983 1987 1991 1995 1999 2003 2007 2011 2015 2019
FDP 2 23.2 21.8 22.2 24.0 23.3 22.9 21.0 20.2 19.9 17.3 15.8 15.1 2 16.4 15.1
CVP 22.1 20.3 21.1 21.3 20.2 19.6 18.0 16.8 15.9 14.4 14.5 12.3 11.6 11.4
SP 23.5 22.9 24.9 24.4 22.8 18.4 18.5 21.8 22.5 23.3 19.5 18.7 18.8 16.8
SVP 11.0 11.1 9.9 11.6 11.1 11.0 11.9 14.9 22.5 26.7 28.9 26.6 29.4 25.6
Zw'total 79.8 76.1 78.1 81.3 77.5 72.0 69.4 73.7 80.8 81.7 78.7 72.7 76.2 68.9
LdU 9.1 7.6 6.1 4.1 4.0 4.2 2.8 1.8 0.7 * * * * *
PdA 2.9 2.6 2.4 2.1 0.9 0.8 0.8 1.2 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.8 1.1
GPS * * 0.1 0.6 1.9 4.9 6.1 5.0 5.0 7.4 9.6 8.4 7.1 13.2
FPS * * * * * 2.6 5.1 4.0 0.9 0.2 0.1 * * *
GLP * * * * * * * * * * 1.4 5.4 4.6 7.8
BDP * * * * * * * * * * * 5.4 4.1 2.5
Rest 8.3 13.7 13.4 11.9 15.7 15.6 15.9 14.3 11.7 10.0 9.5 7.5 7.2 6.6
11939 Silent elections in Appenzell Ausserrhoden, Lucerne, Neuchâtel, Schwyz, Solothurn, Ticino, Vaud, Valais and Zug
2Fusion of the FDP and LPS at the federal level under the name "FDP.Die Liberals". In 2011, the FDP and LP had not yet merged in the cantons of Basel-Stadt and Vaud. Due to the merger of the FDP and LPS at the national level, the nationwide party strength of the FDP including the LP-VD and LP-BS is calculated.

Source: Federal Statistical Office

criticism

Radical, conservative

When the magic formula was established, the “proportional thinking” and the resulting “proportional division and distribution of the Federal Council's“ power ”were criticized, especially from the liberal side. There were also a few conservative representatives who thought that the decisive factor was "primarily the man who is given responsibility, regardless of his party affiliation".

Social democrats

From the left, the magic formula, more precisely the participation of the Social Democrats in the Bundesrat, was called into question every time parliament elected someone other than the official SP candidate to the Bundesrat. This happened with Hans-Peter Tschudi in 1959, with Willi Ritschard in 1973 and 1983 with Otto Stich . The apologists for an exit believed that it was important "to emancipate oneself from the lazy magic of symbolic participation in power" (Ruedi Brassel). However, they did not prevail. An extraordinary party congress of the SP in February 1984 in Bern decided with a large majority to remain in the Federal Council.

Current discussion

Today it is sometimes argued that the party landscape has changed so much with the establishment of the GLP and BDP (each 5.4% party strength in 2011) that a 2: 2: 2: 1 formula is no longer appropriate.

However, since the magic formula was introduced in 1959, there have been several parties that were not involved in it and achieved more than 5% party strength, such as the LdU (5.5% in 1959, 9.1% in 1967), the FPS (5.1% in 1991 ) and especially the GPS (5% or more since 1991).

It is true, however, that the magic formula today (as in 2004–2008 when a seat was changed from the CVP to the SVP) would result in a distribution of seats that no longer corresponded to the proportions of party strengths of the blocks, which were naturally blurred, as was the case from 1959. If all parties represented in parliament are taken into account, the proportional distribution of seats according to blocks (right, center, left) is today, as in 1959, 3: 2: 2 (and thus today, as in 1959, corresponds to the actual one), while the magic formula 4: 1: 2 would result (calculated according to the Hagenbach-Bischoff procedure customary for the National Council elections ). This would mean that the crucial element in establishing the magic formula - that the middle can form majorities with the left or the right - would no longer play a role.

concordance

What is largely undisputed in Switzerland is that the concordance has been and should continue to be an essential reason for the stability and continuous development of Switzerland for decades. The political participation of all, inclusion of all, is one of the principles of Swiss democracy, which should also reflect the composition of the Federal Council, be it in the form of the magic formula or some other form (see also Proporz (Switzerland) ).

In the following - viewed from the experience of other, representative, political systems - it is stated that this can also prevent blocking of political decisions by the strongly developed direct democratic rights.

literature

  • Martin Rosenberg : The meaning and purpose of the “magic formula”. In: In the field of tension of politics. 1968, pp. 158-162.
  • Arthur Fritz Reber: The way to the magic formula - Swiss Federal Council elections 1919–1959. Lang, Bern 1979.
  • Ruedi Brassel et al. (Ed.): Magic formula: Lazy magic? SP Federal Council participation and opposition in Switzerland. Basel 1984.
  • Peter Weigelt : Magic formula or lazy magic? Zurich 1995.
  • Andreas Gross et al. (Ed.): Another Switzerland is possible. 2003.

Web links

items

  • The magic formula: origin, problems, alternatives - the magic formula seems to have passed its prime. Never since its inception in 1959 has the electoral strength of the parties in the Federal Council been so poorly represented as after the 2019 elections. That stimulates the discussion about alternatives , Michael Surber, Frank Sieber, NZZ November 20, 2019

Remarks

  1. ↑ Federal Statistical Office: Proportion of votes received by a party in relation to the total of all valid votes cast.
  2. ↑ A real “exclusion” , as proclaimed by the SVP, is not legally possible, since only parliamentarians - and not federal councilors - can be members of a parliamentary group. The federal councilors of a party usually belong to the parliamentary group executive and take part in parliamentary group meetings in an advisory capacity, but - unlike parliamentary group members - are not allowed to submit motions or vote. Since a Federal Council cannot be a member of a parliamentary group anyway, it cannot be excluded.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Michael Hermann : Reason to de-excitement. What is really moving in Swiss politics? An analysis beyond right fairy tale hour and left horror show ( memento from November 23, 2010 in the Internet Archive ). In: The magazine . August 31, 2007, accessed August 17, 2010.
  2. ↑ a b Christian Seidl : Magic from Falkenstrasse - The genesis of the term "magic formula". In: NZZ. November 27, 2003, p. 17 , accessed November 21, 2011 .
  3. ↑ a b Martin Rosenberg (-g.): December 17, 1959. In: Vaterland . December 18, 1959, 2nd sheet.
  4. ↑ Martin Rosenberg: Sense and purpose of the «magic formula». In: In the field of tension of politics. Ceremony for Dr. Martin Rosenberg on his 60th birthday (editor: Alois Hartmann ), Conservative-Christian Social People's Party of Switzerland, Bern 1968, 180 p., P. 158–162.
  5. ↑ Roger Blum : Sonderbund - Landesstreik - Xenophobia - The Concordance has always encompassed different party currents - the people were important in each case. In: NZZ. November 21, 2011, p. 15 , accessed November 21, 2011 .
  6. ↑ Urs Altermatt : Hollowed Foundation of Concordance - Government proportionality was a consequence, not the starting point of the Swiss reconciliation and equalization policy. In: NZZ. February 23, 2011, p. 15 , accessed November 21, 2011 .
  7. ↑ Bernard Degen : Referendum. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland .
  8. ^ Bernard Degen : Popular initiative. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland .
  9. ↑ Federal Chancellery: Federal resolution regarding the petition for a revision of the Federal Constitution made by the popular initiative of August 3, 1880
  10. ↑ Direct Democracy: The People's Initiative is a Success Story , NZZ , July 5, 2016
  11. ↑ Hans-Peter Tschudi : Magic formula - a successful instrument, thoughts on the idea and future of concordance. In: NZZ. P. 15, July 9, 1998.
  12. ↑ Urs Altermatt: An office of political importance - On the upcoming election of a new Federal Chancellor In: NZZ. P. 17, October 3, 2007.
  13. ↑ a b Martin Pfister: The magic formula - legacy of the thirties? - The way to political concordance. In: NZZ. P. 15, December 8, 1999.
  14. ↑ Urs Altermatt: Strokes of fate in the Federal Council - When health problems lead to leaving the government. In: NZZ. November 14, 2008, p. 17 , accessed November 21, 2011 .
  15. ↑ a b Willy Bretscher : Victory of the «magic formula». In: NZZ. December 19, 1959, morning issue No. 3931, front page.
  16. ↑ a b Max Rohr : The magic formula. In: Aargauer Volksblatt. December 4, 1959, second sheet, no.282.
  17. ^ Martin Rosenberg (SKK): The conservative-Christian-social faction on the Federal Council question. In: Fatherland. December 10, 1959, No. 286, 2nd sheet.
  18. ↑ Max Frenkel : The magic formula - interplay of calculation and chance. In: NZZ. P. 15, February 24, 1995.
  19. ^ Frank A. Meyer : The stair joke. In: SonntagsBlick . October 30, 2011, archived from the original on January 6, 2012 ; Retrieved November 21, 2011 .
  20. ↑ Urs Paul Engeler : Rosenberg's teaching. In: Weltwoche . October 16, 2003.
  21. ↑ Walther Bringolf : My life. Way and detour of a Swiss social democrat . Scherz, Bern, Munich, Vienna 1965, 510 pp. 497.
  22. ↑ Black Day for Direct Democracy. (No longer available online.) SVP press service, December 13, 2007, archived from the original on August 16, 2011 ; Retrieved November 21, 2011 (press release). Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.svp.ch
  23. ^ SVP Switzerland excludes Graubünden section. In: NZZ Online . June 2, 2008, accessed December 13, 2011 .
  24. ^ Niklaus Nuspliger (nn.): The Swiss Bourgeois Party (BPS) emerges. In: NZZ Online. June 16, 2008, accessed December 13, 2011 .
  25. ↑ Christof Moser: Bäumle's GLP does not vote for SVP! In: Sunday . December 10, 2011, accessed January 7, 2012 .
  26. ↑ Michael Surber, Frank Sieber: The magic formula: origin, problems, alternatives. In: nzz.ch. November 20, 2019, accessed November 21, 2019 .
  27. ↑ Attack on the seat of Cassis? - Regula Rytz enters the Federal Council race. In: srf.ch. November 21, 2019, accessed November 21, 2019 .
  28. ↑ Attack on the Federal Council seat - Greens line up with Regula Rytz - and only with her. In: srf.ch. November 22, 2019, accessed November 22, 2019 .
  29. ↑ Federal Council elections 2019 - Pfister: «CVP will not vote for the majority of Rytz». November 23, 2019, accessed June 25, 2020 .
  30. ^ Before the Federal Council election - Regula Rytz: The green high flyer in the headwind. December 4, 2019, accessed June 25, 2020 .
  31. ^ Frank Sieber, Claudia Baer: Federal Council election: Parliament refuses the Greens entry into the Federal Council. In: Neue Zürcher Zeitung . December 11, 2019, accessed December 18, 2019 .
  32. ^ Statistical Lexicon, National Council elections: Strength of the parties. (No longer available online.) Federal Statistical Office, archived from the original on November 18, 2011 ; Retrieved December 13, 2011 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.bfs.admin.ch
  33. ↑ Ruedi Brassel , Bernard Degen , Andreas Gross , Jakob Tanner (eds.): Magic formula: Lazy magic? SP Federal Council participation and opposition in Switzerland. Z-Verlag, Basel 1984, ISBN 3-85990-064-1 .
  34. ^ Georg Kreis , Andreas Suter : Democracy. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland . April 13, 2016 , accessed June 12, 2019 .