There is something surreal about the debate between the parties ahead of the upcoming general elections: we discuss "when" and "with what kind of lists" to get there, while neglecting the fact that, as the days go by, it is increasingly probable that the rules will once again be dictated by the Porcellum.
This because to make an electoral reform, if we are not yet out of time, we are certainly in the Cesarini area. And, beyond the sporting metaphors, they certainly don't help speed things up the “obscene” and the “stupid” proposals, which occupy the chronicles of the newspapers these days.
Let's start with the first, or rather, the first. The PDL has said it is willing to change the electoral law in the direction of the French double round, only on condition that the structure of our institutional framework is changed first, instituting semi-presidentialism, ie the direct election of the Head of State. For heaven's sake, everyone has the right to propose amendments to the Constitution even on very delicate topics, such as those concerning the presidency of the Republic. But the Pdl would like to arrive at this constitutional change of great importance with a simple amendment. And only after the constitutional change is it ready to discuss a new electoral law.
It is evident that, if four parliamentary readings are needed and (if there is not, as is possible if not probable, a two-thirds majority) a confirmatory referendum to amend the Constitution, there will not be time to change the electoral rules in time . Given that, foreseeing the completion of the current Legislature, it will still be necessary to vote in 10 months (April 2013). Sure, anything can be done on paper. Even in only 10 months, but two things would be needed: a ready-made agreement and a very consistent and cohesive majority, which does not exist nor is it foreseeable to exist in the next few days. Not to mention that it would be truly bizarre to change the rules for electing the new Head of State less than a year (June 2013) from when the House and Senate will have to meet in joint session to choose Giorgio Napolitano's successor.
Now let's move on to what we have called "silly proposals". Politically dumb, that is. It has aroused much controversy, even within the Democratic Party, the hypothesis launched yesterday by Stefano Fassina promptly and vigorously denied by the secretary Bersani. Which can be summed up as follows: if the Monti government fails to carry out the reforms and the parties do not immediately change the electoral law, we might as well vote in October. A hypothesis that overlooks two facts and which in the end ends up being self-defeating precisely for the Pd, which would assume the responsibility of opening a government crisis in the most delicate moment due to the difficulties affecting the whole euro area and also to bring down the last few possibilities to modify the Porcellum. Furthermore, in this way, the Pd would end up pulling the chestnuts from the fire to the Pdl, pulling the plug just when it is increasingly in difficulty in ensuring support for the Monti government of its very quarrelsome components.
But other silly proposals have been circulating these days. Especially those that relate the hypothesis of going to the political elections with many civic lists, which could arise in imitation of the grillino model. In the Pdl, there has been talk of unpacking the various components for some time, and there is questioning and gearing up to contain a hypothetical Montezemolo list. But this time the civic list or lists would concern above all the periphery of the Democratic Party. The hypothesis is what has gone by the name of possible Saviano list or Republic list. In essence, the Democratic Party could favor the creation of a satellite list to compete with Grillo, but also and above all with itself, to expand the spaces of the centre-left. Naturally both Roberto Saviano and Ezio Mauro have denied being interested in such an initiative. And there's no reason not to take their word for it.
The fact remains that it is truly singular that, while discussing dates and list formations, in the end the most probable hypothesis remains that of going to vote with the old rules, due to the incapacity of what should be a parliamentary majority, which, in addition to supporting the Monti government's efforts to restore Italy's credibility, could do its bit to restore the feasibility of a democratic system to voters. We are in the Cesarini area. The parties agree within a few days on essential changes to the Porcellum. They present a parliamentary proposal on which at least one of the houses of Parliament decides before the summer break. At this point the parties will at least know how to adjust to prepare for the political elections, to be held at the natural end of the legislature, i.e. in April 2013.
