Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Can anyone explain how today's election actually works?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:10 PM
Original message
Can anyone explain how today's election actually works?
I've read that people vote simply for a slate of candidates. There are many "slates" and some of the slates contain upwards of 230 candidates.

There are 275 assembly seats available, 30% of which are reserved for women.

So how does it work? How do they actually divvy up the available seats among the leading slates?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
hippiechick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. Here's how it works:
Those who aren't completely terrified, or shut out, show up to vote.

The votes are 'counted', and the Bush/oil/military spending puppet is declared the winner sometime Monday.

Pretty simple, eh ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. heheh
yeah, that much I knew.

But I was still wondering how they at least PRETEND the assembly-seats will be allocated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Here is a good page with info on the vote...

and one with the various parties. Just click on the link on the right hand side re Iraqi Elections: /

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. thanks
that helps. Evidently it's proportional representation, so if one party receives 20% of the vote, they will receive 20% of the seats, starting at the top of their slate of candidates and working down.

The question then is how did they arrange the order of candidates on the slate? I suppose each party ordered it the way they wanted. So it would suck to be the 230th person on the list :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lefta Dissenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. But wait,
I just heard yesterday on the 'news' that this is Iraq's first "full, free and fair" election in Iraq in over 50 years! Don't you watch the news??? Don't you KNOW??? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
5. Sure. Easy
You vote for which ever slate you want. We (the US) tell you who won. Whoever is still alive in that slate become leaders. Any slots available are filled with candidates we approve of.
Simple. Almost as easy as it is here.

Sarcasm off
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
agitpropagent9 Donating Member (169 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
6. here you go
a good FAQ-style primer from mother jones
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
poe Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
8. Here's a look at the dog and pony show-CPA Exec. Orders Stand
A Brief Guide to the Iraqi Elections
E-mail this
Print this
Jo Wilding, Electronic Iraq, 29 January 2005

1. Iraqis are voting not for a party or an individual but for a list.
• There are a very few individuals and parties standing as such but the majority are part of lists. There is, for example, a 'main Shia list' and several other Shia lists, some Kurdish lists, and so on.
• The lists contain, between them, over 7000 candidates, many of whom are not even named for security reasons.
• That means people are more or less compelled to vote not according to the credibility or policies of a person or party but for an ethic group, a national group or a religious faction.

2. Iraqi people have no opportunity to elect their president or prime minister.
• The elections will create a 275 member National Assembly which will select a 3 member presidency council, which in turn will select a prime minister. It's assumed, but nowhere stated in the 'transitional law' that these selections would come from among the 275 elected members.

3. None of the elected members of the National Assembly will represent a locality.
• Former US viceroy Paul Bremer decided the entire country should be a single constituency so the electoral system creates a national proportional representation.
• Anyone who gets a 275th of the vote will get a seat, regardless of how many others are elected from their city or province.
• The system creates a likelihood of over-representation at the national level for groups which turn out in high numbers. For example, in Kurdistan, where security is much better and people are more in favour of the elections, far more people are likely to vote, giving the Kurds greater representation than their numbers warrant. Of course, they were unrepresented, to all intents and purposes, for decades (thanks to Winston Churchill and all who followed him) but the solution isn't to simply shift the inequalities.

4. Large areas of the country are not expected to be able to vote.
• Interim leader Ayad Allawi stated that there are 4 provinces where the security situation militates against voting – he didn't mention that they include Baghdad, and up to half of the population.
• The people of Falluja have not been registered to vote or given voting cards.
• A lot of Iraqis believe that a lot of the attacks and unrest have been orchestrated by the occupying forces using covert operations, stock-in-trade of both the interim prime-minister Allawi and the current US viceroy ('Ambassador') John Negroponte. The areas where security 'militates against voting' are those where voters can't be relied on to vote for someone 'unpalatable'.
• There's been intimidation in some areas – Felicity Arbuthnot reported a case of a family visited by their local shopkeeper who asked for their ration book 'for safekeeping'. Ration books are needed as ID for voters and the family refused. Later the shopkeeper came back in tears – he'd been threatened, on his family's lives, to collect all the ration books.

5. The rules for polling and who can or can't be a candidate were set, essentially, by the US.
• Rules were set by the Independent Iraqi Electoral Commission, or some similar arrangement of those words. The group, bar one or perhaps two members, were appointed by Paul Bremer, before handing over “power” in June.
• The Commission has absolute power to bar any candidate or organisation. It has banned a number of candidates but is so secretive that nobody knows who has been forbidden or for what reason. There's been no due process, no establishing a case against a candidate before barring.
• Candidates and organisations taking part have to swear allegiance to Bremer's law
• One of the bars is “moral turpitude”. That in itself is not unusual- many countries don't allow a person with certain convictions, for example, from standing. The bar does not, though, apply to either Ahmed Chalabi, a US appointee to the interim government who has been convicted (in his absence) of massive fraud, or Ayad Allawi, US-appointed interim prime minister, who was a covert CIA operative commanding bombings including a school bus and a cinema in Iraq during Saddam's rule.

6. Expat voters are expected to decide the result.
• A huge number of people living outside Iraq will be allowed to vote. There are 3 polling stations in the UK, several in the US and others in fourteen countries around the world. Contacting of expats to invite them to register appears to have been selective.
• The UN opposed the expat vote as highly vulnerable to fraud but the election planners chose not to listen.
• Because expat voters don't face the security risks of Iraqis in-country, a higher proportion of those eligible are expected to turn out.
• It's a bit unclear exactly what are the criteria for being allowed to vote but it appears to be possible even for people who have never lived in Iraq but whose parents did.

7. Certain parties and individuals have also been funded by the US.
• The International Republican Institute, an organisation linked to the US Republican party has been funding certain groups in their campaigning, giving a massive advantage.
• It is also believed to be organising the exit polls.
• It orchestrated, among other things, the coup in Venezuela.

8. Whoever wins, the occupation will go on.
• The US has built enormous bases in Iraq which it has no intention of withdrawing from.
• The US has already spent more than $100,000,000,000 on the war in Iraq – that's a hundred thousand million to most of us, a billion to the US. Bush is requesting another 80 thousand million dollars to carry on.
• US officials, mainly remaining anonymous, have made it abundantly clear that the elections are free only within the parameters set by the US government. The US is prepared to 'tolerate' a limited form of theocracy, according to one.
• Iraqi candidates are aware that there are 'red lines' as an unnamed Shia official put it – the election winners will not be at liberty to set any policy they choose.

9. The new government is already bound.
• The next plebiscite (on a permanent constitution) has to be held under Bremer's law too: any three of the eighteen governorates can veto the constitution, even if the constitution wins 90% of the total vote.
• It was unlawful for Bremer or the occupying powers to enact any laws, because an occupier is not allowed to change the laws of the country seized. Nevertheless, Bremer ruled, and the interim governing council signed into law, that everything in Iraq is to be privatised, open to 100% foreign ownership or at least foreign leasehold for forty years. That includes resources, amenities and public services.
• Because of the lack of security, little has yet been sold off but the law, though illegitimate, is expressed as binding on future governments.
• Iraq is the most indebted country in the world in terms of its debt to export ratio. Saddam's wars built up massive debts, now at $180 billion. Western countries and the IMF were happy too carry on funding Saddam with loans and to sell him weapons, including the chemical weapons and related hardware to attack the Kurds. Added to that are compensation claims ($30 bn) from the invasion of Kuwait, mainly 'owed' to incredibly wealthy oil companies and such like. Now, with the constant addition of compound interest throughout the sanctions, when Iraq was unable to pay off any debts at all, the debt is immense.
• The Paris Club and others have agreed to a package of debt relief which is linked to a programme of 'structural adjustment' whereby Iraq has to follow Argentina, Romania and others into disastrous policies of global capitalism. 30% of debt relief is unconditional, 30% depends on adopting a 'standard IMF policy' and 20% hangs on a three year review of implementation of the IMF policy. Iraq hasn't got any bargaining power to resist.
• Two of the IMF's conditions are the 'opening up' (read cheap sell off to Bush's pals) of the Iraqi oil industry and the rollback of the food ration, currently the only major social welfare programme, presumably because it means people with no money get stuff free instead of paying for it. The leading candidates have agreed to all this – that's why they got the money to become leading candidates.
• The debts left over after the promised, but conditional, relief are still more than enough to keep Iraq in servitude for many, many decades to come.

10. Iraq has no free press.
• Allawi and co issued a rule that the press have to publish versions of events which put the government's point of view.
• Press 'disrespect' to Allawi is banned.
• Al Jazeera and Al-Arabiya and an unknown number of smaller outlets have been banned already for refusing to conform.

11. The Iraqi people fought for this election.
• Last year, Iraqi people held massive demonstrations for elections. Other demonstrations had been fired on by coalition troops so it's no exaggeration to say people risked their lives for elections.
• It was only when they realised they faced unrest from thousands and thousands of ordinary people, including the ethnic and geographical groups which had been quiet till then, that the occupying powers backed down and started working on ways to distort the election and turn it to their advantage.
• Opposition is nation-wide to the distortions imposed on the election. Thousands of anti-occupation activists are being arrested across Iraq (under martial law).
• Though the preferable option, clearly, must be an end to the occupation, there were demands from the Iraqi National Foundation Congress – a far more representative group than the interim government, never mind the electoral commissioners, that would have made the elections substantially more fair:
1. That the elections are supervised by a commission of figures with known credentials of impartiality and integrity, internationally and in the Arab and Islamic world.
2. That this commission supervises all the local committees in all phases of the elections.
3. That essential changes are made to the still anonymous Permanent Election Commission appointed by the American ex-governor contrary to any criteria of transparency and integrity. As a minimum:
a. to include a representative from each competing list
b. to include a number of Iraqi active and veteran judges with known integrity
c. to remove the right to arbitrarily bar any candidate in the election except through legal process of incrimination.
4. That measures are taken to ensure safe and fair conduct of elections in all cities and country towns as follows:
a. an immediate halt to all military operations against towns and neighbourhood.
b. withdrawal of all occupation forces from all towns and neighbourhoods at least one month before election date.
c. release of all political prisoners regardless of their political affiliation especially those not specifically charged.
...with thanks to Dahr Jamail, Ewa Jasiewicz, Gabriel Carlyle from Voices in the Wilderness and countless friends in Iraq for helping me make sense of it all.

Between November 2003 to mid May 2004 Jo Wilding was in Iraq and wrote for Electronic Iraq during the war.

Page last updated: 29 January 2005, 13:47

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. well
that's a simple, straightforward system for people who've never voted before. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
poe Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. only the most devout and cynical conspiracy theorists
will now be able to doubt the grand benevolance of the American as He spreads democracy even to the freedom hating infidels in mesopotamia. Here comes Mcfalafel and genetically engineered camels. oh, and we're killing people. CPA Executive Orders stand and you cannot save your own seed as you have done for the last millenia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ms. Clio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #8
14. Thanks for this--all the right wing trolls here
Edited on Sun Jan-30-05 01:49 AM by Ms. Clio
who are so insistently pushing the shiny-happy-feel-good-Iraqi-election-is-just-the-first-step-towards-glorious-democracy should be forced to read every word of this.

Of course, then their pinheads would explode, so, like vampires shun daylight, they resolutely refuse to confront these simple truths.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:27 PM
Response to Original message
9. Once upon a time
An evil criminal and his gang, invaded a sovereign nation, saying
that they were an imminent threat to his nation's people. In truth
the evil criminal was just doing this to steal the other people's
land, their mineral rights and to make them pay for opposing his junta.
As well, when all was said and done, he was supporting his gang that
made weapons of murder, and who wanted to test those weapons.

Well after the gang killed many thousands of people, they discovered
that the people were fighting back, and to get out of any responsibility,
they created a list of people who were loyal to their gang, and held
an election so that people could vote on the list... coke or diet coke.

Then the evil man and his army were very put out that the fake selection
did not produce the reduction in violence he had hoped, so he wasted
a huge bundle of taxpayer's money and made his gang of thugs stay there
and get killed for many years.

Then all the people who had nothing to do with the evil man and his
gang, and who avoided them totally, lived happily ever after.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
poe Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. yup
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Up2Late Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
11. WELL, here's the deal
This is Vote #1, today those who DO vote, are voting for a "Slate" of like minded people to an Assembly similar to our "Continental Congress." These people (those that aren't Killed in the next few weeks, will get together to write the first ever, Iraqi Constitution,and depending on the percentage the "Slate" gets, that percentage will determine how many of that "Slate," go to this Congress. And as some of us learned in school (before it was dropped for "Just say NO to Birth Control" classes) A "Constitution" is a basic, or Core, set of laws (a starting point).

Then, when that is done (and because most likely all of those "Founding Fathers and Mothers will be dead :cry:), the Iraqi's will have another election to pick the actual legislature.

The whole process involves 3-5 elections, I'm fairly sure. :boring:

That's how it's suppose to work, I'm sure everyone else will have the Most likely scenario, in the posts that follow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 24th 2017, 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC