A year and a half ago, when Israel decided, by a vote of the Knesset, to raise its electoral threshold to 3.25%, critics called this move “undemocratic”. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel declared that “the basic principles of the Israeli democratic system are being undermined”. As I reported back then, “the opposition staged a silent protest, signifying what its members consider an attempt to shun minority representation in parliament… a group of Israeli intellectuals published a letter of protest against the new legislation”. Knesset Members petitioned the High Court and argued that “the newly legislated threshold is geared to entirely remove Arab parties from the Knesset”.
“Your aim is to banish the Arab MKs from the Knesset”, the head of the leftist Meretz Party, Zehava Gal-On, cried during the Knesset debate. “This bill is shameful”.
So much for political panic. So much for political predictions.
If raising the entry bar from 2% to 3.25% was “shameful” or not could still be debated. Truly, I do not see how a 1.25% increase makes an entry bar more shameful – how a 3.25% is more shameful than a 2%. We can also debate if the whole affair was necessary. This is still in doubt – as the number of parties in the next Knesset might not be smaller than the number in previous terms (making the entry bar higher was supposed to decrease the number of parties and make Israel's system more stable). However, when it comes to the new threshold's impact on Israel's political system there can be no debate: most predictions, alarmist cries, populist accusations, and general smearing seem laughable today.
If the aim was to banish the Arab parties – it did not happen. In fact, Arab voters are likely to be represented in the parliament by more Knesset Members this time.
If it was strongly argued that Arab parties cannot merge into one party – it is now obvious that they can.
In fact, as one looks at Israel's current state of political affairs, it is the right that has to worry about the new threshold much more than the left, and it is Jewish voters that might lose representation much more than Arab voters.
Three parties are threatened by the new electoral threshold according to recent polls: two on the right and one on the left. Of these three, the most likely to suffer is the party on the extreme right – the new party formed by Eli Yishai. The higher entry bar may play a role, and not for the first time, in blocking Kahanist elements from getting a seat in the Knesset. That is not something that leftist (or Arab) Members of Knesset should be complaining about. If Yishai does not get in, this would possibly mean a loss of a fair number of rightist votes, a number that in the old system would mean around three seats in the Knesset.
Another party that isn't getting enough votes to convincingly make it secure against the new threshold is, ironically, the party of one of the main advocates of the new threshold – Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman. Probably because of the negative impact of new corruption investigations against members of the party, and the not-quite-appealing list of candidates that Israel Beiteinu assembled, the party is just slightly above the danger zone. In the last six polls it got 4, 5, 5, 7, 6, 5.
One party on the left is also in danger: Meretz. Not the Arab parties, to the left of Meretz, but rather the party of the “Jewish” left. The latest six polls gave Meretz 5, 6, 5, 5, 4, 5, and its leaders, understandably alarmed, have decided as a result to change strategy. Starting this week, their attacks on the Labor party – the main party of the left – will become more frequent and much more nasty. Meretz has no other choice: its voters are not abandoning it to vote for the right – they are abandoning it to vote for the leftist party that has a chance to form a government.
Herzog and Livni make a convincing case that for them to be able to challenge Netanyahu it is crucial that they have more votes than the Likud Party. In fact, they are using the same argument that was presented when the threshold was raised – that larger parties are the ones that should get the votes, and that smaller parties are disruptive to the cause of governance. Netanyahu is arguing the same thing on the right, while making sure not to offend potential future coalition partners. The voters that want a right-wing government should know that a small and weak Likud means they are much less likely to have a coalition to their liking.
What does all this tell us?
That maybe, just maybe, the low threshold can have some success in reducing the number of parties and driving the voters toward the larger parties.
That in politics the result is rarely what people expect it to be – the unintended consequences of the new threshold can be quite amusing.
That Israel's culture of political hysteria – the obligatory threat that Israel's democracy is about to crumble because of this or that legislation – should be taken with a grain of salt. Next time you hear someone declaring Israel's democracy is in mortal danger, remember the electoral threshold.
