Upcoming Event

November 14, 2004  

"Politics and Liberal Democracy: U.S. and Australian Elections"

by Professor Chandran Kukathas

Chandran Kukathas is the Neal A. Maxwell Professor of Political Theory, Public Policy, and Public Service.  He is a graduate of the Australian National University, the University of New South Wales, and Oxford University.  His main field of research is political theory but he is also the author of a number of books and articles on Australian politics, including The Australian Political System and The Theory of Politics: an Australian Perspective.

Synopsis of Presentation: The close of 2004 saw national elections in two of the world’s oldest and most stable democracies, the United States and Australia.  Though these two allies have many interests in common, similar legal and political institutions, and a history of close association, their systems of democracy are also very different.  This talk considered the similarities and differences between these two political systems, and reflected on their respective strengths and weaknesses.  Its broader concern was with what these similarities and differences reveal about the nature of democratic government.

On October 9th, 2004, the Liberal National Party won 52 1/2% of the vote in the federal elections, winning both a majority of Lower House seats and a majority of Senate seats. John Howard formed a new government and became Prime Minister.  The election raises several important questions:

* What do we make of these election results?
* What do these trends reveal about public opinion?
* Do these results tell us anything about democracy?
* What kind of general theoretical basis do we have for drawing any conclusions in answering these questions?

To place the questions in context, we can look at the work of philosopher David Hume.  Hume divided motivations for political parties into three different kinds: 

- motivations from principle
- motivations from interests
- motivations from affection

These types of motivation have a lot to do with the way political parties are formed.  What we usually find in any political party is a balance of these three motivations.  Finding the right balance is the key to electoral success.

The Australian political system is not a presidential system.  Although John Howard is Prime Minister of Australia, Australians didn't vote for John Howard.  Rather, the party that wins most of the seats in the Lower House will be able to form a government.  The Australian political system is a constitutional monarchy.  The Head of State is the Queen of England; but there has been a movement in recent years to turn Australia into a Federal Republic.  The institutions of government are largely republican.  The Australian political system is a hybrid of the American and British systems.  Australia has a Senate and a House of Representatives.  Whoever wins a majority of seats in the House of Representatives forms the government.  Legislation must pass in both Houses to be enacted into law.  Currently John Howard's party has a majority in both the House and the Senate.  The government consists of the Prime Minister and his Ministers.  The Governor General is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.    There is a High Court that is somewhat like the U.S. Supreme Court that handles any disputes about the interpretation of the Constitution as well as disputes between the States.

Political Parties:
The Liberal Party was formed in the 1940's.  It is the party of free enterprise, although its origins lie in protectionism.  The National Party was formed in the 1920's.  The Liberal National Party is a coalition of these two.  The Labor Party was founded in the 1890's.  Historically it has been the party of socialism.  It split in the 1950's and consequently was kept out of office for roughly 2 and 1/2 decades.  And the Green Party has been garnering an increasing number of votes.

Electoral System:
The party or coalition that wins a majority of the seats in the House of Representatives forms a government and their leader becomes the prime minister.  Australians vote on candidates by ranking them.  The rankings are used to determine who gets greater than 50% of the vote and therefore wins the seat.  Ultimately, Australians choose who is the least unpopular.  In the Upper House there is a single transferable vote which is something like a proportional system.  As a result, it is more likely for minor parties to win seats in the Senate.  This makes it difficult for any party to win a majority of seats in the Senate.  Of the the four parties, the Labor Party usually garners a plurality but not a majority of the seats in the House, but as a coalition the Liberal National Parties receive the majority and so prevail.

Australian Society:
* 20 million people
* Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of US$500 billion
* 13 million voters
* Founded and first settled in 1788
* Constitution in 1901
* First World War, Galipoli, in 1915
* 1975 - Governor General exercised power to dismiss the Prime Minister

Australian People:
There is little to no religion in Australia.  Most people's attitudes are purely secular.  There is low church attendance and no strong religious movements.  Religion is not politically significant.  Australians are obsessed with sports.  Australians tend to be informal and do not revere their politicians.  Though the country is becoming more multi-cultural, and there are no significant social divisions.

Social System:
The Australian social system is a welfare state.  A national health scheme and private health care exist side by side.  There is publicly funded education but also private education.  There are 70,000 troops in the defense force.  Australia has an alliance with the United States.

Trade Unions:
There used to be a system of national wage fixing that no longer operates.  Trade unions have declined in importance.

Current Situation:
* Low inflation
* Low government debt
* Budget surpluses
* Low interest rates
* Security is not a significant issue

Australia is doing pretty well economically and financially.  There is no discernable difference between the Liberal National Party and the Labor Party on health care.  There is a strong environmental lobby in Australia.  Although the Labor Party advocated strong environmental policies, labor lost the timber worker vote.  The current Labor Party leader had an image problem.  Labor failed to read a shift in the Australian electorate; it only won 39% of the first preference vote.  There was a shift in the electorate so that more and more of the working class voted for the Liberal National Party. More and more of the Labor vote comes from the intellectual class.  Basically there was a conflict between two moderate alternatives in an 
insignificant election.

Electoral issues of 2004 in Australia in order of importance:
- Economy
- Health care
- Environment
- Security
- Iraq war
- U.S. alliance

Why John Howard Won:
As the incumbent, Howard appealed to the right combination of interests, principles, and affections.  Because the economy is in good shape, Australians had no reason to make a change.  (Similarly, George Bush appealed to the right balance of interests, principles, and affections in the U.S. elections.)