What are the disadvantages of proportional representation?

Answer:

That would be cheating!!!...just kidding haha The most often cited disadvantage is that a proportional representative system leads to weak government. Since coalitions are often created there is the possibility to great arguments forming in the government which causes it to fall and a new election being needed. Now I personally don't see this as a bad thing since it means that the government is more dynamic, evolving to meet the views of the people as they alter with the changing times. However, this is not always wanted in a time of crisis. When an war is imminant you do not want the government sitting in its chamber bickering over the colour of the pens in the pen holders. You want a decisive leader to make a decision quickly to deal with the situation before it gets worse.

It is also important to note that independent candidates are not possible in this sort of system. If 95% of the vote goes to a candidate and the other 5% goes to a number of other candidates it is impossible to give that independent candidate 95% of the representation. However, with a hybrid system such as Additional Member System or it is possible for an independent candidate to stand as the additional member.

It can also be claimed that coalition governments can be controlled more easily by a radical party. A famous example is the Weimar Republic and its hijacking by Adolf Hitler's N.S.D.A.P.. After the Munich Putsch failed Hitler adopted a plan of using the system to get his way. Since the system implemented was a proportional system (similar to what Germany has now) the party was able to gain a small amount of support and then use this to hold the coalition government hostage. Since the government would need their support over certain issues it was possible to weedle more power out of the system. This, in conjunction with propaganda and other shifty policies, led to the election of Adolf Hitler as chancellor etc.. (see other nodes for more details on this).

Another offshoot of the coalition government is that the compromise and negotiation over legislation can lead to a bill which no one really wants. Instead it is made up of bits and pieces which appease different people but no one is truly happy over. This leaves bills which are an horrible mish mash of ideologies.

It can also be said that the constituency link between a representative and his/her constituents is lost in the multi-member constituencies. With British MPs and USA's Congressmen there is a link between them and the people who voted them into office. They are in the assembly to voice the views of the people in the chamber when debating. This often means go back to the voters to ask their opinion. So in England, MPs often hold surgeries every week to answer voters' questions and listen to their problems/ideas. With multi-member constituencies it is said that this link is weakened and so direct democracy is even more damaged.

Though these criticisms seem quite good it is important to note that it requires extenuating circumstances for this sort of thing to occur. We also all hope that we are more politically aware and so would not be subdued by propaganda etc.. Many PR systems run rather well with the current German system as well as the Netherlands'

First answer by ID1382996744. Last edit by Satishsohal. Contributor trust: 0 [recommend contributor recommended]. Question popularity: 3 [recommend question].