The proportional?
There are the pros, there are the cons.
The first invoke the obligation for the National Assembly to be representative of the diversity of political sensitivities existing in the country;
the second argue about the need for an elected official not to be "above ground".
The two points of view are defended and can each be presented for a response to the democratic crisis such as the episode of the “yellow vests” and, even more, the constant progression of abstention reveals it.
Read also:
Is Macron reneging on a promise by burying the proportional?
In fact, the choice is not binary.
The MoDem, carrying two versions on the subject, provides proof of this.
Providing the most accurate photograph of public opinion presupposes a shift to integral proportionality.
Knowing that there are several ways to qualify this photograph.
By setting a minimum threshold for winning elected officials and retaining a constituency that is not the entire national territory.
This is what François Mitterrand did for the legislative elections of 1986,
This article is for subscribers only.
You have 72% left to discover.
Subscribe: 1 € the first month
Can be canceled at any time
I ENJOY IT
Already subscribed?
Log in
/cloudfront-eu-central-1.images.arcpublishing.com/prisa/2C5HI6YHNFHDLJSBNWHOIAS2AE.jpeg)
