In a recent episode of EconTalk, host Russ Roberts sat down with Rachel Gur of Reichman University to discuss the unique system of government in Israel. Rachel Gur has a wealth of experience in Israeli politics, having served in senior positions in the government.
The conversation began with a discussion of the Israeli parliamentary democracy, which is unlike the system in the United States. Israel operates under a parliamentary, single-constituency, party-list, proportional-representation electoral system. This means that there is only one house of parliament with 120 Members of Knesset (MKs) who are elected based on party lists rather than individual candidates.
Rachel Gur explained that the number of 120 MKs is a throwback to the Second Temple period, where there was a Council of Elders with 120 members. However, she pointed out that this number may no longer be sufficient for a country the size of modern Israel, which has a population of around 8 million eligible voters.
One of the key features of the Israeli electoral system is the party-list voting method, where voters select a party rather than a specific candidate. This has led to concerns about the lack of internal democratic mechanisms within the major parties, as party leaders often have the power to appoint candidates rather than holding internal primaries.
Russ Roberts and Rachel Gur also touched on the old-school nature of Israeli elections, where voters use paper ballots and cardboard boxes to cast their votes. Despite the simplicity of the voting process, it has been criticized for its lack of modernity compared to other democracies.
Overall, the discussion shed light on the complexities and challenges of the Israeli system of government, highlighting the need for ongoing reforms to ensure a more effective and representative democracy. Rachel Gur’s insights provided valuable context for understanding the unique political landscape in Israel and the implications for democracy as a whole. Israel’s unique party list system has long been a topic of discussion and debate among political scholars and analysts. The system, which determines the composition of the Knesset based on party lists rather than direct elections, has significant implications for the functioning of Israeli democracy.
One of the key issues with the party list system is the lack of geographic representation for Members of Knesset (MKs). Unlike in countries with district-based electoral systems, Israeli MKs do not have specific constituencies to represent. This lack of geographic accountability means that MKs are not answerable to a specific group of constituents and can only be held accountable by their party leadership.
This lack of geographic representation also limits the independence of MKs. Since they are appointed to the Knesset based on their position on the party list, MKs are beholden to their party leaders for their political future. This creates a power dynamic where party leaders have significant influence over the actions and decisions of their party members.
Furthermore, the party list system in Israel has been criticized for creating a lack of balance of power between the Executive and the Legislature. In Israel, the Executive (the government) is appointed by the Legislature (the Knesset), which means that party leaders who are part of the Executive have a say in who gets elected to the Legislature. This creates a situation where the Executive appoints the Legislature, rather than the other way around, leading to a lack of checks and balances within the government.
In recent years, the party list system in Israel has resulted in a proliferation of political parties, with many former party members breaking away to form their own parties. This trend has led to a deeply personal political system, where party leaders who have fallen out with their former colleagues often form new parties to challenge the status quo.
Overall, the party list system in Israel has both advantages and drawbacks. While it allows for a diversity of voices and viewpoints in the Knesset, it also creates a system where party leaders have significant control over their members and where geographic representation and accountability are limited. As Israel continues to grapple with these challenges, the debate over the party list system is likely to remain a central issue in discussions about the country’s political future. Israel has experienced a significant shift towards the right in recent years, with the aftermath of the 1973 war serving as a catalyst for this change. The country has seen a proliferation of right-of-center parties, with the jockeying for position often taking place within this political spectrum. The divisions within the right have become increasingly important in shaping the political landscape of Israel.
One of the key differences between left and right in Israel, as compared to other countries like the United States, is the overwhelming focus on security issues. The relationship with Palestinian neighbors and other neighboring countries that are often hostile towards Israel has been a central concern for the past few decades. This focus on security has overshadowed traditional social and economic issues, with the right-of-center parties taking varying stances on these matters.
Within the ultra-orthodox parties, there is a surprising amount of pluralism, with different factions leaning towards different economic ideologies. For example, Aryeh Deri, a prominent figure in the Shas Party, is considered a left-winger when it comes to security and foreign affairs, despite the overall shift towards the right within the Haredi community. This highlights the complexity of political affiliations within the ultra-orthodox parties.
The issue of military service for the ultra-orthodox community has been a contentious issue, with some factions within the community serving in the army while others do not. The internal politics within the ultra-orthodox parties further complicate the political landscape in Israel.
Despite not having a formal constitution, Israel has a functioning democracy with an Executive, a Parliament, and a Judicial Branch. The absence of a constitution has led to debates about the relationship between the Judicial and Legislative branches, highlighting the unique legal framework in Israel.
Forming a government in Israel requires building a coalition of parties due to the lack of a single party with a majority of votes. The largest party does not always form the government, as seen in past elections where smaller parties played a crucial role in shaping the government. Personal politics and coalition building are key factors in the Israeli political system, showcasing the importance of negotiation and compromise in forming a stable government. In the recent events in Israel, there has been a shake-up in the political system that has left many scratching their heads. The President, a largely ceremonial role in Israel, is tasked with giving the mandate to the Party Leader in the Knesset who is most likely to form a coalition government. This process is not just a formality, but an essential part of the Israeli political system.
However, the recent events have led to a sense of disenfranchisement among the populace. Many feel frustrated with the political system, feeling that their votes do not translate into the government they hoped for or hold their leaders accountable. This frustration is not unique to Israel but is a global phenomenon that has contributed to a move towards right-wing politics.
In Israel, forming a government is a delicate dance of offering positions and money to potential partners. The head of the largest party or the party leading the negotiations sits down with multiple partners to offer them positions in return for their participation in the government. The more prestigious the partner, the better positions they will be offered, such as Minister of Finance or Minister of Justice.
Money also plays a significant role in forming a coalition government in Israel. Coalition money, allocated from the Treasury to organizations affiliated with the party, is used to secure support from different groups. This system has been criticized, especially in the United States, where there is a debate over government funding of NGOs.
However, some argue that coalition money is a positive aspect of Israeli democracy. It creates buy-in from diverse groups within Israeli society, including the ultra-orthodox parties, who have become integral to the political system. This funding has helped integrate these groups into Israeli society and has led to a more inclusive political landscape.
Overall, the recent events in Israel highlight the complexities of forming a coalition government and the role of money and positions in the process. While there are criticisms of the system, some see it as a necessary component of Israeli democracy that fosters inclusivity and buy-in from diverse groups within the country. The Haredi world has always been known for its fierce independence and critical analysis of Israeli society and politics. With a free press that is not afraid to kick, scream, and bite its way to the truth, the Haredi community has always been a force to be reckoned with. However, in recent years, mainstream Israeli society has started to take notice.
Whether it’s through print media, the internet, podcasts, or radio shows, the Haredi community has started to make its mark on the broader Israeli society. And, thanks to the influence of coalition money, they have been able to not only buy political buy-in from the parties but also cultural buy-in from the man on the street.
It may be hard for the Haredi community to backtrack and become less interwoven into Israeli society. The coalition money has incentivized engagement and encouraged the community to become more connected to the modern world. The result is a growing presence of the Haredi community in various aspects of Israeli society.
One area where this shift is particularly evident is in the question of military enlistment. While traditionally the Haredi community has been hesitant to join the Israeli army, the influence of coalition money and the changing dynamics of Israeli society may lead to a significant uptick in Haredi enlistment in the future. This could take the form of more Haredi individuals joining the military in specific roles, such as the medical field.
The coalition system in Israeli politics has also brought to light some interesting dynamics. With a plurality rather than a majority, parties are forced to come together and offer goodies to one another in order to form a coalition. This competition for access to these goodies can lead to compromises and partnerships that may not have been possible otherwise.
However, the coalition system is not without its challenges. The backroom deals and lack of transparency can lead to mistrust and broken promises. This can make it difficult for parties to honor their commitments and can ultimately lead to instability within the coalition.
Overall, the influence of coalition money in Israeli politics has had a significant impact on the Haredi community and Israeli society as a whole. It remains to be seen how these dynamics will continue to evolve in the future, but one thing is certain: the Haredi community is no longer content to sit on the sidelines. They have made their mark on Israeli society and are here to stay. Israel’s electoral system has undergone several changes over the years, particularly in terms of the threshold required to secure representation in the Knesset. Initially, when Israel was first established, only 1% of the vote was needed to enter the Knesset. This low threshold led to a proliferation of small parties and a fragmented political landscape, where coalitions had to be formed with numerous members to reach the required majority of 61 seats.
In an attempt to address this issue and promote stability, the threshold was raised to 2% in 1992 and then to 3.25% in 2014. The goal was to encourage the formation of larger parties that would be less susceptible to manipulation by smaller parties holding disproportionate power. However, the unintended consequence of this change was the disenfranchisement of voters who supported parties that failed to surpass the threshold.
In the current system, if a party receives less than 3.25% of the vote, their votes are redistributed among the parties that did meet the threshold. This often results in larger parties gaining additional seats at the expense of smaller parties, leading to frustration and strategic maneuvering among political actors to avoid falling below the threshold.
One notable example of the impact of the increased threshold occurred in the 2019 elections when Naftali Bennett’s New Right Party narrowly missed out on entering the Knesset, falling just below the required percentage by a small margin. This close call highlighted the challenges posed by the threshold system and the potential for votes to be effectively “shredded” if a party fails to secure representation.
Overall, while the intention behind raising the threshold was to create a more stable political environment, the reality has been increased volatility and a series of re-elections as parties jockey for position to avoid being left out of the Knesset. The Israeli electoral system continues to be a topic of debate and discussion as politicians and voters navigate the complexities of representation and coalition-building in a multi-party democracy. The world of technology is constantly evolving, with new advancements and innovations being made on a daily basis. One area that has seen significant growth in recent years is artificial intelligence (AI). AI is the simulation of human intelligence processes by machines, especially computer systems. It has the ability to learn, reason, and make decisions like a human, and has the potential to revolutionize industries across the globe.
One of the key benefits of AI is its ability to automate tasks that were previously done by humans, saving time and increasing efficiency. For example, in the healthcare industry, AI can be used to analyze medical images and assist doctors in diagnosing diseases more accurately and quickly. This can lead to improved patient outcomes and reduced healthcare costs.
AI is also being used in the financial sector to detect fraudulent activities and make investment decisions. By analyzing vast amounts of data in real-time, AI can identify patterns and anomalies that humans may not be able to detect. This can help financial institutions to mitigate risks and make more informed decisions.
In the field of transportation, AI is being used to develop autonomous vehicles that can navigate roads and make decisions without human intervention. This has the potential to reduce accidents and improve traffic flow, leading to a safer and more efficient transportation system.
AI is also being used in the field of customer service, where chatbots and virtual assistants are being used to provide instant support to customers. These AI-powered tools can handle a wide range of inquiries and provide personalized responses, improving customer satisfaction and reducing the workload on human agents.
Despite the many benefits of AI, there are also concerns about its impact on jobs and privacy. As AI continues to automate tasks that were previously done by humans, there is a fear that many jobs will be lost. Additionally, the use of AI raises questions about data privacy and security, as AI systems require access to vast amounts of data to function effectively.
Overall, AI has the potential to revolutionize industries and improve our daily lives in countless ways. As the technology continues to advance, it will be important for policymakers, businesses, and individuals to carefully consider the ethical implications of AI and work towards harnessing its power for the greater good.
