For some days now, the lists of candidates of the various parties for the general elections of 4 March 2018 have been available on the website of the Ministry of the Interior. From those lists it is possible to draw some useful indications on the strategies of the parties, at least in relation to multiple candidates, gender representation , the rate of innovation of the parties in the recruitment of candidates. Istituto Cattaneo analyzed these aspects, in relation to the most important lists, integrating data from the Ministry with other information from the websites of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate. Here's what transpired.
The multiple candidates
With regard to multiple candidates, the electoral law provides for the possibility of standing as candidates in several multi-nominal constituencies (up to a maximum of five), in addition, possibly, to a single-member constituency. The ban on standing as a candidate in both Chambers remains unaffected. Multi-candidates can therefore take part in up to six different competitions. How have the major parties used this possibility?
In the first place, it should be noted that the parties have resorted to multiple candidatures with moderation, at least in its most extreme version. In total, between the House and the Senate, the candidates on the lists we are considering here are 2970. Of these, only 472 candidates are present in more than one constituency. The parties more often resort to the 1+1 formula, i.e. a single-member candidacy flanked by one in a multi-nominal constituency, such as the M5s, for example, for which the multi-nominal candidates all fall into this case. The smaller parties, on the other hand, resort more frequently to "extreme" pluricandatures. For example, Fratelli d'Italia uses the 5+1 formula in eight cases.
The candidates present in the largest number of constituencies are typically national leaders (Giorgia Meloni, Ignazio La Russa, Daniela Santanché, Maria Elena Boschi, Marianna Madia, all present in six competitions, Matteo Salvini, Giulia Bongiorno, Laura Boldrini, Roberto Speranza in five) , which are expected to have a knock-on effect in favor of less well-known candidates. It is also interesting that the majority of these multiple applications concern female candidates. All 16 candidates engaged in 5+1 competitions are women; 12 of the 14 candidates in 4+1 constituencies and 9 of the 14 candidates in 3+1 constituencies are also women.
One could see this as an attempt by the parties to give greater visibility and importance to female candidates; on the contrary, more realistically, it is to be expected that these multiple candidatures will pave the way, for each female candidate elected, to five (or four, or three) elected men. In fact, given the obligation of male/female alternation in the proportional lists, the multi-candidates who obtain the single-member seat will inevitably leave their place to the male colleagues who follow them in the lists of the proportional constituencies.
How much do I change?
The second figure we analyze concerns the degree of innovation that the parties have decided to introduce in their candidacies. To explore this phenomenon further, we have taken into consideration the "seniority of service", i.e. the number of parliamentary mandates that the different candidates have fulfilled in their political career. Over 75% of candidates in single-member constituencies - where the result is more uncertain or less predictable than in multi-member constituencies - do not have any parliamentary mandate behind them. This trend is particularly marked for the two "newer" parties, such as LeU and the M5s: respectively, 92% and 86% of their candidates in the single-member competition can be defined as a new entry in the circuit of potential parliamentarians.
At least in part, this figure can be explained by the lower probability that these lists (especially LeU) have of winning seats in single-member constituencies. Conversely, the two centre-right and centre-left coalitions - which control a higher share of "safe" seats than the other lists - report a lower than average level of innovation in the recruitment of candidates. For example, for centre-left parties, the share of new entries among candidates in single-member constituencies is reduced to 57,5%, i.e. by almost 20 percentage points compared to the average value. This figure highlights the decision by the Democratic Party and its allies to focus on politically known candidates, including those of the ministers of the outgoing government, even in single-member constituencies.
If we look at the data relating to candidates with only one parliamentary mandate behind them, at least two relevant aspects emerge. On the one hand, in the centre-left coalition approximately 30% (106 out of 346) of the candidates in the single-member competition are looking for reconfirmation: the highest figure among all the lists that are presented for the vote and which derives from 'high number of MPs leaving the ranks of the Democratic Party. On the other hand, the M5s is characterized by the absence of candidates who have been in parliament for more than one term. After all, this is an obvious consequence of the fact that in 2013 the elected members of the M5s were all absolute rookies. The bond of the two elective mandates self-imposed by the internal rules of the Movement will begin to apply from the next elections.
Finally, our analysis shows that the candidates characterized by a higher level of parliamentary seniority are found above all within the centre-right coalition. Specifically, there are 53 center-right candidates in single-member constituencies who have been in parliament for at least two or more legislatures. The most "expert" among the single-member candidates is Pier Ferdinando Casini, candidate from the PD in Bologna. If elected, he will inaugurate his tenth legislature (he appeared in parliament for the first time in 1983: he was elected eight times to the House and once to the Senate). Ignazio La Russa (FdI), Massimo D'Alema (LeU) and Emma Bonino (+Europe) follow, with seven legislatures each.
If we now look at the level of renewal among candidates in multi-member constituencies, we can see that in 79% of cases (1561 out of 1976) aspiring parliamentarians are neophytes of the profession, in the sense that they have never sat in the benches of parliament in the past. However, this figure is significantly reduced for candidates on the Democratic Party lists, where the new entries are "only" 54% (185 out of 341). Being the largest outgoing parliamentary group of the XNUMXth legislature, the Democratic Party had in fact a greater pool of deputies and senators to be re-nominated.
As regards the other lists, the level of turnover of aspiring parliamentarians reaches the highest levels for the minor parties. In fact, candidates in plurinominal constituencies without a parliamentary mandate reach almost 95% for the Brothers of Italy, 93% for the Lega and 85% for LeU. For Forza Italia and the M5s, the level of turnover among candidates in the plurinominal lists is instead halfway between the two extremes, around 75%. We have talked so far about the renewal of the political class, using the percentage of new entries as an indicator. But it is also possible to analyze the perlamentare seniority, i.e. the "seniority of service" of candidates who are already parliamentarians.
From this perspective, it is the lists of Forza Italia and, secondly, those of the Democratic Party that more frequently include candidates with a number of mandates equal to or greater than two. In Berlusconi's party, approximately 19% of the candidates have already been in parliament in at least two legislatures, while for the Democratic Party this percentage is reduced to 12%. The particular datum of the M5s is obviously also confirmed in the analysis of the candidates in the multi-nominal constituencies, in whose lists we do not find - for the reasons explained above - aspiring parliamentarians with two legislatures already held. Among the candidates for the proportional representation with the longest parliamentary career behind them, in addition to the already nominated D'Alema and La Russa, Maurizio Gasparri, Elio Vito (FI) and Roberto Calderoli (Lega) stand out, each with seven legislatures.
…but will it be real replacement?
The data just presented, for both single-member and multi-member constituencies, could suggest a high rate of renewal and turnover in the parliamentary class in view of the next general elections. While it is still too early to determine to what extent novice candidates will actually enter parliament, we can nonetheless analyze in which list positions in multi-member constituencies candidates without previous parliamentary experience are placed. New entries are clearly more present in the last positions of the lists (in third or fourth place), ie those where election is less probable.
This aspect applies to all the parties analyzed here and, in a decidedly more marked way, to Forza Italia, Pd and M5s, that is to say to those lists that will most likely have the widest parliamentary representation in the next parliament. Consequently, the particularly high level of renewal of the parliamentary class that we observe "at the entrance", i.e. in the candidate recruitment phase, is destined to be greatly reduced "at the exit", once the electoral process is concluded.
The "transformers"
Finally, the Istituto Cattaneo also analyzed the presence, within the lists for the March 4 vote, of candidates who changed their "jacket" in the past legislature, moving from one parliamentary group to another. How much were MPs who changed parties during the legislature rewarded, and by whom? Examining single-member and multi-member candidates separately. Starting from the single-member constituencies, it is noted that the parliamentarians who changed groups in the XVII legislature amount to a total of 66, placed in all alignments with the exception of the M5s.
The largest group is found within the centre-right coalition, where 27 (7,8%) MPs have been re-nominated despite (or thanks to) a change of group in parliament. In second place we find the Democratic Party, in whose single-member lists there are 20 parliamentarians who have changed sides, mostly from SEL or from the group, later dissolved, of Civic Choice. In the case of LeU, for the single-member party, the outgoing parliamentarians who changed party affiliation during the legislature are 19, equal to 5,5% of the total.
These numbers, referring to outgoing deputies or senators who have changed their parliamentary group, are significantly reduced if the lists of candidates in the proportional part of the competition are taken into consideration. How can this difference be explained? The most likely hypothesis is that the major parties have preferred to nominate the so-called "transformist" parliamentarians in the most uncertain competitions, i.e. those in single-member constituencies where re-election tends to be more complicated. However, it is worth noting the case, going against the trend, of LeU: the parliamentarians who changed sides in the last legislature are more numerous among the candidates of multi-member constituencies than those in single-member constituencies. Being composed largely of MPs who have left the Pd group, it is probable that the new formation (LeU) has decided to make the safest positions available to ex-Pd deputies or senators in the proportional component of the electoral competition.
