Political crises that affect how the government functions, such as a lack of stability, a lack of governability, or an impasse in forming a government, usually spark debate about the need to fix the system. The minimum electoral threshold [the minimum percentage of votes a party must secure to be represented in the Knesset] is discussed at length. A common position among those who argue in favor of "fixing the system" is that the minimum threshold, which currently stands at 3.25% – the equivalent of four seats – should be raised.
Those in favor of raising the minimum threshold make a few arguments: First, that it would force parties to form larger alliances to make it past the threshold. Second, that instead of factions that are politically close to each other emphasizing the differences between them, they could form intra-party alliances that would moderate each group's positions. Finally, they argue that small parties would not be able to threaten to split ranks because they are worried about passing the minimum threshold. The resulting reduction to the number of parties would reduce the rifts in the Knesset, thereby increasing governability, they argue.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
These arguments lay out a causal relationship between several different factors, even though that relationship does not necessarily exist, and reflect the view that changing the system would necessarily lead to changes in society and its leadership.
The idea of raising the minimum threshold is often characterized as an attempt to increase the power of the big parties at the expense of the small ones. But enormous changes have taken place in the party system, without the minimum threshold being changed at all. With the same small minimum threshold in place, we transitioned in the 1980s from having one big, dominant party to having two large parties. Demographic, cultural, and political changes all played important parts in that change. On the other hand, even though the minimum threshold has been raised by increments since the 1990s, the big parties aren't anywhere near 40 seats.
Another goal of raising the minimum threshold is to reduce the number of factions in the Knesset. Some people get confused between factions made up of multiple parties, and parties. Indeed, nine factions made it into the Knesset in this election – but they include 20 parties. The Joint Arab List includes four different parties, while the Blue and White, Democratic Union, and Yamina lists each comprise three parties. Anyone who thinks that raising the minimum threshold would do anything to reduce the fractured leadership in the Knesset got a reminder this week that it would not, when the Balad party broke rank with the rest of the Joint Arab List and did not recommend that President Reuven Rivlin charge Benny Gantz with forming a government.
The "effective number of parties" provides an "adjusted number" of political parties in a given country's party system by counting the parties and weighting that count by the parties' relative strength. Paradoxically, the April election saw a relatively low level of parliamentary divisiveness, according to the effective number of parties, compared to the elections that preceded it. So what happened? 2009 and 2015, which saw the highest levels of splitting, each saw two different governments in a four-year period. In April, despite the low divisiveness, a government was not formed. The reasons for that lie in our political culture and leadership and do not necessarily stem from the number of factions.
The April election showed us to what extent matters of stability and the ability to form a government are not tied to a high minimum threshold. The opposite – the high threshold is what caused that impasse. Let's assume for a minute that that minimum threshold had been lower, and three parties that were kept out by the threshold had been represented in the Knesset – the New Right, Zehut, and Gesher. If that had happened, the votes for these parties would not have been cast in vain, voters would have been represented, and a large right-wing bloc would have been formed that reflected the will of the public. More importantly, most of the partners in that hypothetical coalition would not have been able to threaten the majority. Despite the prevailing perception, small parties don't pose a threat to stability – the mid-size parties do, and a much bigger one. See "Avigdor Lieberman."
Since the inception of the state of Israel, society has developed while taking pains to ensure that the parliamentary system represents small factions, too. That is the only way that everyone will feel part of the system and give it legitimacy. This is an echo of the culture of Jewish debate, which even in the Talmud took care to protect minority, even lone, opinions. It's time to lower the minimum electoral threshold.
