Tobacco vote and double majority: when the left turns populist
Le conseiller d'Etat Hans Stöckli (PS/BE) en 2019 © parlament.ch
Antoine-Frédéric Bernhard and Jonas Follonier
The double majority rule of the people and the cantons was snubbed unnoticed Sunday February 13 by a Socialist politician, in the context of the vote to ban tobacco advertising. This situation is not new, and is regularly repeated in federal elections, particularly when the double majority rule puts the left at a disadvantage. These regular assaults on the Swiss system are the result of opportunistic populism and attack one of the pillars of Swiss democracy, which is still relevant today. Analysis.
It was a foregone conclusion: whatever the outcome of the vote on the «Tobacco-Free Kids» initiative, the double-majority rule, whereby amendments to the Federal Constitution require not only a majority of the population, but also of the cantons, would be attacked - or at least deemed secondary - by the initiators. Precisely because it was not a foregone conclusion. And it was.
This rule was introduced in 1848, when modern Switzerland was created. According to historian Olivier Meuwly, a specialist in this period, «this rule reflects a willingness to compromise on the part of the winners of the Sonderbund war, the Radicals». The aim was to include the interests of the Catholic cantons, which roughly corresponded to the rural cantons, in the democratic software of fine balances. Whereas, typically, populous, urban and more liberal, historically Protestant cantons have the upper hand during elections, less progressive, Alpine cantons carry more weight in constitutional votes. «What's at stake here is the defense of minorities that federalism ensures overall, and of which the double majority is a consequence.» The minorities in question are the cantons. As a reminder, the Federal Constitution, Article 1 defines Switzerland as being composed of a people and of cantons - that's what a federal state is all about.
It turns out, however, that the double majority rule sometimes serves the interests of the left, since a few small, rather conservative cantons are able to thwart the will of the people, whose numerical majority is to be found in the cities, which are largely committed to left-wing ideas. This was the case, for example, with the federal initiative «Responsible Multinationals», which was narrowly accepted by the people, but clearly rejected by the cantons. As a result, left-wing personalities regularly attack this rule, arguing that, since the 19th century, it has been a matter of course for them to take the initiative.th In the 20th century, the demographic gap between small and large cantons has widened, with one Appenzeller «worth» forty Zurichers. This attitude can legitimately be described as opportunistic, insofar as it responds to a purely utilitarian logic: decrying a political system, or even proposing (for a Sunday) to change it, in order to gain advantages.
Another justification for the double-majority rule is that, when public opinion differs widely from region to region, it is better to maintain the current situation rather than seek constitutional change. The double majority is a kind of safeguard against any form of tyranny of the majority. Former Federal Councillor Pascal Couchepin put it this way on 1er December 2020 following the rejection of the «Responsible Multinationals» initiative, on the set of 19h30«If a law isn't necessary, then it's useless.» This organization of democratic life, because it can give the impression of going against the expression of the popular will, can easily fall prey to populist rhetorical elements, as was the case yesterday - «populism» being first and foremost «a political style, based on systematic recourse to appealing to the people», as historian of ideas Pierre-André Taguieff points out.
Hans Stöckli's populism
On Sunday, February 13, when the majority of the population was in favor of the «Tobacco-Free Kids» initiative, but not yet the majority of the cantons, Bernese member of the Council of States Hans Stöckli, of the Socialist Party, said to the RTS radio station: «For the moment, we're delighted with the majority of the people, and in the end, it's the people who count.» In short, the message is as follows: «If we get the majority of the cantons, all the better, because that means that the people have a majority in enough cantons; if we don't get it, the result isn't really legitimate, because there's a majority of the people anyway, and that's what should take precedence.»
The idea is rather ironic when you note that Hans Stöckli is elected to the Council of States - an institution designed to balance the power of the cantons and the power of the people, like the double majority rule. Let's skip the «we don't care about the rules when it doesn't suit us» part. What's worth noting is the claim that the double majority rule has always been obsolete or even illegitimate. «This kind of statement is clearly populism, as the Swiss left is wont to do,» says Olivier Meuwly.
If you want to reform a system, you first have to understand it and its history. A closer look at the double majority rule reveals that it is the fruit of in-depth political reflection aimed at guaranteeing a balance of power in Switzerland by proposing a vision of democracy other than the law of numbers alone. It is also the fruit of a synthesis between centralism (primacy of the majority of the people) and federalism (primacy of the majority of the cantons), and should not be applied only when the issues to be voted on directly «concern» the cantons, as some elected representatives would like. Depending on historical circumstances, it may be to the advantage of one political camp or another, but it must not be at the expense of populist and opportunistic rhetoric that ultimately serves the interests of one political camp in particular.
Other arguments will be needed to truly legitimize an institutional changeover in Switzerland.
Write to the authors:
jonas.follonier@leregardlibre.com
antoine.bernhard@leregardlibre.com
Header image: State Councillor Hans Stöckli (SP/BE) in 2019 © parlament.ch
Leave a comment