Electoral Reform In Britain

Electoral Reform In Britain Electoral reform in britain was initiated by the reform act of 1867 and consequently first past the post was chosen as the best solution. This essay is trying to establish whether this voting system is still fit-for-purpose and whether there is a chance that it may be changed to a more proportional electoral system. It defines purposes and foundations of the existing voting system and tries to deduce how it works in reality. To do so it assess levels of third party support, their seats in the parliament and the general bias of the electoral system. Based on these explanations it focuses on the reasons for and against change, especially from the point of view of the conservatives and labour, and concludes that although reform is possible it is very unlikely to happen in the short-term. Is the UKs First Past the Post electoral system still fit-for-purpose and is there much chance it will be changed, if not in the short-term, in the medium- to long-term? First Past the Post (FPTP) or simple plurality, as this alternative name suggests, is one of the simplest and earliest mechanisms for voting and is widely adopted around the world including the largest democracies, India and the USA (Sberg Shugart, 2008, p. 7). In the UK, it came about from amalgamation of different mixed voting systems in 1866 and was adopted for all constituencies in the Reform Act of 1884 (Ahmed, 2010, pp. 1069-1074). This essay examines whether the First Past the Post (FPTP) electoral system is suitable for Britains current political environment and whether there is a chance of reform in the future. In particular, it focuses on successes and failures of FPTP and contrasts it with the functions and foundations of elections. It then considers the debate in Britain about electoral reform, a debate that looks set to be put to the political archives once again after the Alternative Vote (AV) referendum in 2011. Finally, it argues that although FPTP has particular shortcomings in handling third party votes and is biased against the Conservatives; in the presence of political will, electoral reform is only likely to take place in the long-term. This author tries to define fit-for-purpose from the foundations of FPTP rather than based on democratic ideals such as fairness and proportionality. As far as this essay is concerned, the purpose of an electoral system is to elect Members of Parliament (MPs) and in turn, the government and not proportional representation, as the latter is one of many functions that any electoral system may perform. To assess whether FPTP electoral system is fit-for-purpose, effects of it on the membership of the House of Commons should first be examined. The desirability of these effects or absence of some desired outcomes of a preferred electoral system would therefore define the need for reform. Firstly, defining the function of General elections would help to decide whether reform is indeed necessary. The arguments could broadly be divided into two opposing ideas: one that seeks to make the parliament a fully representative body of public opinion and the other that puts the emphasis on the ability of the electorate to determine the next government. The former prefers to leave government formation in the hands of the negotiating parties after the elections and the latter is willing to sacrifice proportionality to provide the electorate with this choice. This latter argument is one that has promoted FPTP and a system of single-party government, giving the choice between the governing party and the opposition to the electorate by using an electoral system that more or less guarantees an overall majority to whichever party comes first in votes (Curtice, 2010, pp. 624-626). This, in other words, facilitates a system where two largest parties alternate between government and oppo sition, the system that has mostly governed Britain in the post-war era. There seems to be a desire to keep with this latter function, both historically and at present, whilst attempting to add a degree of proportionality (Ahmed, 2010, pp. 1072-1074; Jenkins Commission, 1998, 9). Whether FPTP is fit for purpose or otherwise depends solely on what is expected from it, and how far these expectations are met. Curtice (2010, p. 625) identifies four crucial foundations to the argument expanded in the previous paragraph based on Duvergers Law and cube law. The former states that FPTP favours a two-party system, making life difficult for third parties ; the latter tries to formulate how FPTP can discriminate against the second party by disproportionate awarding of seats to the party that has won the elections even if by a very narrow margin (Cox, 1997, pp. 13-15, 72-74). Curtice (2010, p. 625; 1986, pp. 210-211) argues that a simple majority electoral system hinders support for third parties by discouraging voters and awarding those parties with smaller proportions of seats; allocates more seats to the winning party to facilitate a majority government; and at the same time awards this majority without bias to the two largest parties in different elections. These are features of an ideal electoral system in Britain conducted under the rules of FPTP. The question is whether influence of other parameters have changed the outcome of the elections to circumvent results predicted by Duvergers Law and cube law (Curtice, 2010, pp. 624-626; Curtice Steed, 1986, pp. 209-213; Jenkins Commission, 1998, 3.19-3.32). Let us first consider the effects of FPTP on third party votes and allocation of seats. Curtice (2010, pp. 626-629) utilises data compiled by Rallings and Thrasher (2007) and shows that although until 1974 share of third party votes in General elections was compatible with predictions of Duvergers Law, since then it has gone up from an average of less than 10% in previous years to an all-time high 34.9% of the vote . Moreover, the number of seats won by third parties in general elections has also increased from less than a dozen before 1974 to almost 90 in 2010 (BBC News, 2010; Rallings et al., 2007). It is fair to consider that this outcome is still compatible with Duvergers Law in that their share of seats are far less than their share of votes. However, this discrimination against third parties depends on geographical concentration of their voters (Curtice, 2010, p. 629; Jenkins Commission, 1998, 3.30). A similar share of votes in 1983 only awarded them 27 seats. This change is l ikely to make a hung parliament more possible. Secondly, FPTP should award more seats to the winning party than its lead in the polls. If cube law is to operate, a 1% swing to the winning party should result in as much as 3% of seats changing hands between the winning and second parties (Duverger, 1963, p. 322). This exaggerated effect that gives an easy majority in the House of Commons to the party in government is shown to be dependent on the number of marginal seats (Curtice, 2010, pp. 629-631; Curtice Steed, 1986, pp. 209-213). Ever since 1974 general election, the number of marginal seats that have changed hands between Labour and the Conservatives has come down from over 27% to 15% at the last general election, due to a trend towards geographical concentration of the Conservative and Labour support (Curtice Steed, 1986, pp. 209-228). Another factor that skews this further is to do with the last foundation described above; that the cube law operates without bias towards any parties. Curtice (2010, pp. 633-635) demonstrates that FPTP has been treating Labour more favourably when awarding exaggerated majorities in the recent years. This bias towards Labour adds to an already reduced number of marginal seats to fail FPTP in its main goal of providing two main alternatives to the electorate. Whether there is need for reforming the electoral system for the General elections in the UK, this reform may well happen or its chances become limited based on political calculations of the party/parties in power. Under the then Labour government, The Independent Commission on the Voting System (Jenkins Commission) was setup in 1997 with a remit to find an alternative electoral system to conform to a list of requirements that are broadly based on an extension of FPTP. These requirements were (i) broad proportionality; (ii) the need for stable government; (iii) an extension of voter choice; and (iv) the maintenance of a link between MPs and geographical constituencies (Jenkins Commission, 1998, 1.1). Comparing these requirements to the foundations of FPTP discussed above and as the requirements were not absolute one could argue that the need for a majority government would demand an exaggerated number of seats allocated to the winning party, something FPTP is already trying to ach ieve, and still be considered broadly proportional (Jenkins Commission, 1998, 9.18). The Jenkins Commission therefore proposed Alternative Vote (AV), another plurality voting system, plus a number of top-up seats to make it more proportional. Since AV is the best option put forward and has already been rejected by the electorate, it is hard to imagine that an electoral reform based on AV could happen anytime in the short- or medium-term. The reasons that hinder the change to the electoral system are not as numerous as they used to be over most of the twentieth century. FPTP does not provide the full extent of the exaggerative qualities it once did. Although, all major parties have mentioned reform of one kind or another in their latest manifestos (2010 Party Manifestos, 2010), the level of acceptance for reform amongst political parties also depends on whether they are in government or in opposition. Political parties in opposition tend to favour electoral reform, but when a party comes to power under FPTP, they are less likely to adopt changes (Sberg Shugart, 2008, p. 47). They appreciate the advantages, namely a strong mandate and one-party majority government that are less likely to exist if a more proportionally representative electoral system were to be adopted (Dunt Stevenson, 2013). In addition to this, there are also conflicting arguments as to who is the beneficiary of reform. There is no doubt that all thi rd parties will gain more seats under any electoral system that is more proportionally representative than FPTP. The question is which large party is going to lose. The majority of literature claims that if nothing changes apart from the voting system, e.g. number of MPs, constituency boundaries, etc., the Conservatives are going to lose the most seats (Blau, 2008, pp. 864-866; Payne Quilty-Harper, 2011). This can partly be eliminated by redrawing boundaries and reducing the number of MPs both proposed by the coalition government but they are unlikely to have an enormous effect in addressing the discrimination towards the Conservatives (Curtice, 2010, p. 637). Besides, this same dependence of an exaggerated majority in parliament to such a small swing in votes brings government public policy to the ideological centre and encourages legislation by consensus based on logical explanations by Chandler and Downs (cited in Curtice Steed, 1986, p. 211). This affects public satisfaction with the government in a positive way, since every party favours staying in power as long as possible. Because of this, public support for reform of the voting system is unlikely to be substantial. However, apart from pressure groups and minority parties who mainly favour proportional representation there are several reasons why larger governing parties mainly the Conservatives and Labour may favour electoral system reform. The most important and often forgotten reason being their attempt to defend their share of vote by adopting a more proportional system to prevent losing out to growing support of the third parties (Dunleavy Margetts, 2005, pp. 854-855). Moreover, Blau (2008, pp. 61-63) considers three other reasons for a change from within: proposing a popular reform and gaining votes as a result; as a concession to a coalition partner ; and the prospect of more votes and seats owing to an electoral reform . Blau (2008, p. 63) emphasises that the first reason is the most likely way for a reform process to start, but it also needs to be self-promoting to the party to gain traction. This could be one of the reasons why electoral reform did not happen in the current govern ment after the 2010 General elections, as Dunleavy and Margetts (2005, pp. 864-866) show the Conservatives are the least likely to gain any seats from a move to a more proportional electoral system. In considering reasons for this change, there are many other arguments that could not be expanded in this short essay. Such arguments include among many, under-representation of women and ethnic minorities due to the great emphasis on party affiliation; a great number of MPs being elected by plurality rather than majority of votes, prevalence of safe-seats limiting the choice for some voters, and as a result producing lower turnouts, and also no choice in electing a government and local representatives separately (Curtice, 2010; Dunleavy Margetts, 2005; Jenkins Commission, 1998, 3,4b). In addition, one should also consider the historic context where electoral system reform has been considered. As already mentioned in the beginning of this essay, many debates were held in the parliament in the latter half of the nineteenth century, for and against adoption of proportional representation in which FPTP has always been the outcome (Ahmed, 2010, pp. 1069-1074). This continuation of reform initiatives shows that there is a prospect of change only if it comes in the right time. This author believes that such reform is highly unlikely to take place in the short-term due to the recent AV referendum. It is also unlikely in the medium-term, as no other alternatives to AV have been proposed and large parties have little incentive to implement changes. However, this situation can only improve in the long-term. Change to proportional representation has been discussed for almost 150 years and is most likely to happen when favourable conditions exist. In conclusion, change seems possible if not likely, considering that we extrapolate current voting trends into the future (Blau, 2008, pp. 85-87). Most literature discussed above is of the belief that change will happen if third parties continue winning more seats and pose a threat to the duopoly (Ahmed, 2010; Curtice, 2010, 2012; Dunleavy, 2013; Dunleavy Margetts, 2004). It may result in a swap between the Liberal Democrats and one of the two largest parties, as happened in first half of the twentieth century. On the other hand, the prospect of a hung parliament in itself is not enough to make this change take place. Interests of large parties and MPs should also be aligned with it.

Parker Pen Company Essay

Background George Safford Parker founded Parker Pen Company in 1892 in Janesville, Wisconsin. It began with the production of his first fountain pen. Afterwards in 1894, Parker had its first major innovation; â€Å"the lucky curve† which consisted on reducing the leak caused in fountain pens. Parker’s first marketing approach was to produce high quality pens and make them become status symbols; Parker pens were signer’s favorite, giving the company the first or second position globally. The company obtained this successful position due to investigations and development by constantly innovating for the production of new products; for instance with the creation of Quink â€Å"quick drying ink, they produced the Parker 51; which became a bestseller and was catalogued as â€Å"the most perfect pen ever produced†. It gave the company $400 million within 30 years. By the end of 1980 the parker pens were sold in over 150 countries. In 1987 the company’s headquarters was moved to Newhaven, East Sussex, England. Then in 1993 Parker was aquired by Gillette Company, which already owned the PaperMate brand. Then in 2000 Gillette sold the company to Newell Rubbermaid, and became the largest in the world owning writing products with brand names such as, Sharpie, Parker, PaperMate, Waterman and Liquid Paper, among others. People involved George Parker the founder James R. Peterson the president and CEO of Parker Pen: Peterson has to deal with the compay’s problems, for instance instead of having over 40 publishing firms he hired one that could do the job of all. Jack Marks the head of writing instruments advertising Richard Swart the marketing vice president: Before entering Pen Parker, he worked for 3M Carlos Del Nero is Parker’s manager of global marketing planning. Business involved Pen Parker Company Gillette Company Newell Rubbermaid The U.K. subsidiary Ogilvy & Mather: Main problem Parker Pen Company faced some difficult years where they were not obtaining as much revenues as expected. Therefore the company hired a new board of marketing directors seeking the implementation of new strategies for the company. The new board, which consisted of highly qualified people, began their campaign by standardizing the products in a centralized system. This centralized system consists of abolishing plurality in the decision-making. The new system they adopted which was a world wide strategy caused the company more than $20 million in looses. Marketers didn’t investigate therefore gave the company a negative image in the market. Solution Due to the fact that the company was having some issues that was preventing the company to rise up, in 1985 the CEO was fired, moving the company’s new system to a decentralized one. The company is now able to adapt to changes, it is able to adapt to the numerous cultural barriers existing around the world, creating different marketing plans for each nation; with this, Parker regain their image in order to be able to position themselves in the market. Questions 1.The globalization process in the Parker pen company was a failure until major structural changes were implemented by James R. Peterson. Before this  change the company had misdirected its efforts to globalize its operations, many key maneuvers were ignored and this led to a close to bankruptcy status which was never in the company’s plans. Basic rules of globalization for any company state that an extensive research of the potential market has to be done, and very thoroughly. investigating the market conditions in not enough, political, legal, social and cultural aspect have to be at the top of the list to ensure that the strategies will b effective and that consumers will respond positively to the strategies implemented. This was one of the things that Parker pens failed to do, they just relied on a weak currency that allowed foreign markets to purchase American-made products, this would only last until the U.S. dollar lost its acquisitive value. Another reason why their globalization process failed was because they broke another fundamental rule, they didn’t centralize their operation and gave creative and operational autonomy to all of their branches. This caused a great loss of corporate identity and became a big problem at the most critical time since a different solution was to be presented for each one of the subsidiaries. 2.The problem that Parker pen had in its globalization process was spawned form miscalculations or lack of vision in very key areas. The first thing which globalization promoters at the Parker Company underestimated was the strength and impact of the changing market. They never considered that economic and political conditions would vary in such a way that their overseas operations would collapse in such a way. They relied on a very strong dollar which made it easy for foreign costumers to purchase their products, making this their most important income source. By overlooking this important event they drove themselves into an awkward position where they had low sales internally and over autonomous subsidiaries with a large stock and no market share at all. The other factor that they failed to consider seriously before engaging in such a risky entrepreneurship was the fact that they were living in a time when Chinese massive production was starting to flood the markets with cheaper and more convenient products, at a point where people demanded  cheaper product due to a volatile economy and political situation. Their product line depth and width were very impressive with over 400 different product, they had a solid portfolio but nothing to compete directly with the mass produced pens coming from China. They relied on their traditional products and their traditional distribution channels, in which they were losing their entire market share as well. 3.The Parker pen company is one on thousands of examples that can be quoted as being merged with a bigger company; this is an inherent condition of globalization as an economic phenomenon. Like everything else that is involved in globalization, this specific case of being acquired by a bigger company has its upside and its downside. For a company like parker that had a considerably large operation worldwide, the negative things are lesser important than the positive things. The main negative factors that this could have are for example a possible loss of the company ´s know how. By having to accommodate to another company’s rules and methods, Parker could have lost its own knowledge of the business, this is a very valuable commodity in the world today and it’s hard to maintain it when a company has to become an active part of another one. Uniting Parker pens to Gillette and Rubbermaid could also trigger a dangerous situation amongst the employees, changing cities and managers has a very large impact of the moral of the employees since they begin to lose their company identity which is another valuable commodity that companies cannot afford to lose since it is one of the main incentives that the workers have. Identity inside the company is just as important as identity outside it, if a merger like this means that there will be changes implemented in the company ´s image it could trigger a loss of costumers or even a major shift in the place that the company has in terms of â€Å"top of mind†. The benefits that this situation could bring upon a company are several and of great importance. In the case of Parker pens, a company with a very important level of recognition worldwide, joining a larger enterprise would imply broadening its market share globally, by having better, bigger and more distribution channels, allowing them to reach new costumers which is a very difficult thing to do in the world today. A big name behind a brand  means more resources, this in turn means more research for product development, more advertisement, more promotional strategies, better market research with a finer degree of segmentation and every other activity that would help a company to better it ´s self. Another very important thing is the support that Parker pens would have by being part of the Rubbermaid holding, this makes it easier to innovate and take risks, it also transmits a sense of safety to the costumer, they know that being part of the world ´s leader in writing instrument s does not come easy, so trusting Parker pens is something they can and should do.

Lobbying Essay

Lobbying is a pathway of action, a way for citizens to influence government, that is essential for to be able to use, but is dangerous when lobbyists push for ideas that are from a minority instead of the majority. Lobbyists are those who attempt to persuade or influence the opinion of the actions of government through sharing information, persuasion, and political pressure via telephone, email, letters, and voicing your opinions directly to your representatives (Congressmen, city council members, senators). Lobbyists also lobby through offering financial aid for their re-election. Lobbyists lobby their representatives usually because they have a closer connection with and were elected by them and other members of their community. Social lobbying is creating a relationship with your representatives through inviting them dinners and trips in order to discuss issues that they are passionate about. Reasons for lobby are usually Lobbying is beneficial to bringing change faster than the other pathways of action, for lobbyists are directly influencing their representatives. Lobbyists benefit government through giving public opinion to issues and through upholding the desires of the people Federal and State Government officials do no just come up with ideas for laws on the spot by themselves; they obtain ideas for laws through the ideas and concerns of the people in order to keep them happy, for the main goal of any political official is re-election. It is required to register as a lobbyist in Texas after 5 days of lobbying and that has contacted any legislature for the purpose of persuasion along with receiving $1000 in compensation or $500 quad-annually. Lobbying benefits government because it is a pathway of action that the citizens of the country can take for the purpose of influencing government, but it can also corrupt government through lobbying the interests of minorities instead of the majority. The creation of the relationships through social lobbying can put a leash on legislatures, and cause these legislatures to be act on the will of the min ority group.

The Capitalist Class And The Proletariat Essay - 2151 Words

Adam Smith and Karl Marx both examine the capitalist mode of production as an issue of central theoretical concern. I will be addressing many issues regarding capitalism from both theorists that will demonstrate the general theoretical orientation that each has towards the nature of capitalism and the roles of the capitalist class and the proletariat. This includes the moral character of the capitalist class, the tendency of capitalism towards crisis, the effects of the division of labour, and the permanence of the system in a historical context. Further, I will also demonstrate why these issues are relevant today, and how many of the arguments made by these theorists are still being used. The first issue surrounding the nature of capitalism I will address is the moral character of the capitalist class as perceived by Adam Smith and Karl Marx. The overall position that Adam Smith adopts in the Wealth of Nations is that the pursuit of self-interest for personal gain of the capitalist can be beneficial for the general welfare of society, so long as it is channeled through the market rather than through the interference of the state (Baumol 1976; McNally 1998). However, this does not imply that the interests of the capitalist class should be the guiding interests of the market. Baumol (1976) argues that Smith repeatedly attacks the personal morality of the capitalists, arguing that the intentions of the individual should not determine the economic fate of society. SmithShow MoreRelatedAccording To Marx, Society Is Primarily Divided On Those1675 Words   |  7 Pages According to Marx, society is primarily divided on those who own property, For Marx, he believes that there are only two primary groups in society and these classes are the bourgeoisies and the proletariats whose social relationship is the motivational force for change in capitalism. But before humans can do anything, they must satisfy certain their basic needs, they must feed, clothe and house themselves though productive labor, as it is the This approach is called by Marx, the MaterialistRead MoreSurplus Value Is The Most Significant Concept1298 Words   |  6 Pagesthe main source of oppression and exploitation over the proletariat within a capitalist society. It allows Marx’s ideas to follow a consecutive lineage, from the oppression of the proletariat, to overcoming false class-consciousness, finally leading to the Proletarian revolution. Surplus value is the key reason why the proletariat must rebel and regain the true value of their labour, instead of it being appropri ated by the capitalist class (Bourgeoisie). The extraction of surplus value is importantRead MoreThe Manifesto Of The Communist Party758 Words   |  4 Pagesexposing the shift of hierarchical distinctions from lord and serf to owner and worker. As Marx and Engels attempt to define the trajectory of history they looks at these issues from a high level of abstraction which allows their major thesis about class conflict providing the basis for historical change to take shape. With this strategy they are able to connect the rise of markets with increasing globalization, colonialism, and commodification. Marx and Engels ability to provide a cohesive base forRead MoreAdam Smith and Karl Marx1053 Words   |  4 Pagesredistribution of wealth was the way to go. Smith believed in a free economic system that gave capitalists rights to accumulate their wealth. Adam Smith explains that wealth was with the landlords and capitalists. This led to a lot of trade between major cities. Once the working class was given power, the fall of these wealthy cities began to occur, thus starting the â€Å"fall of the Roman Empire.† The working class, or the slaves, were the majority, and most men according to Smith will never see the benefitsRead MoreThe Nature Of The Good Life1295 Words   |  6 Pagesphilosopher has their own values and beliefs. I decided to pick one of the most well known philosophers, Karl Marx. Karl Marx’s philosophy is by far one of the most looked at. He called capitalism the dictatorship of the upper class. , saying that it was run by the wealthy class solely to make profit and maximize their own benefits. The end product and goal of capitalism was simply economic gain. In this philosophy there has to be organized production, which includes the means of production, such asRead MoreMarxist Theory On Capitalism And Communism1468 Words   |  6 Pagesstudy of Capitalism and theoretical development of Communism. Historical Materialism Historical materialism serves a dual role in the Marx theories on Capitalism and Communism. The first purpose is a frame for understanding the perpetuation of class inequality throughout history and across societies. The second purpose is in conceptualizing the evolution of economics in society. Historical materialism, as a principle in Marxist theory, has several tenets; material conditions shape social interactionsRead MoreMarxism And The Marxist Theory Of Karl Marx1300 Words   |  6 Pagestended to focus on the understanding of a capitalist society, he aimed to create a materialist analysis, being a historical account, which examines the means in which humans collectively produce the necessities for life. Class- One of the main focuses of Marx’s ideology was class, the belief that all human history is just a succession of form of class societies. Under a capitalist state there is believed to be three class categories the landowners, capitalists and wage labourers but Marx theorised theRead MoreMarx and the Communist Manifesto927 Words   |  4 Pagesand capitalize on their inferior. In his book Marx illustrates the essence of communism by explicating the relationship between the antagonistic groups, addressing the objections leveled at communism, and explaining the relationship between the proletariat and the communist. Marx utilizes a variety of argumentative appeals to persuade readers that communism is the solution to the wretched lives of the majority. As Marx goes about expressing his assertion, he commits fallacies that may hinder his credibilityRead MoreThe Ideology of Karl Marx on Sociology822 Words   |  4 Pagesin 1849 where he spent the rest of his life. A social class can be defined as a large group of people sharing similar economic resources. (Giddens, 1997) Communist Marx identifies two social classes: bourgeoisie and proletariat. â€Å"Marx held that history was a series of class struggles between owners of capital (capitalists) and workers (the proletariat).†(econlib.org, 2013). Marx states that the bourgeoisie cannot exist without proletariat and the other way round. In The Manifesto Marx and EngelsRead MoreClass Struggle and Karl Marx743 Words   |  3 PagesMarx laid out some economic conditions and stages of class struggle in a capitalist society that would lead to revolution. The first condition is that as the bourgeoisie rise, so does a â€Å"proletariat† class that labors in their new industries (p.479). This class of wage-laborers who, having no means of production of their own, are reduced to selling their labor power in order to live, are the unavoidable consequence of the bourgeois modes of production (p.473). As bourgeois industries continue to