The Weimar Constitution: A Primer
Parliamentary systems usually separate the functions of “chief executive” and “head of state”. In Britain, for example, the chief executive is the Prime Minister, the head of state is Queen Elizabeth II. In the Weimar Republic, the chief executive was the Reichskanzler (Chancellor), while the head of state was the Reichspräsident (President). In both Britain and the Weimar Republic, the functions of a “head of state” are largely ceremonial. Also, in parliamentary systems the people do not elect the chief executive directly; instead the parliament elects the chief executive. In the Weimar Republic, this legislature was the Reichstag. Thus there is no strict distinction drawn in parliamentary systems between the legislative and executive branches of government: because the Chancellor (or Prime Minister) is elected by parliament, parliamentary elections determine who will hold the executive power. Rather, in parliamentary systems, the parliament is typically the source of all executive and legislative power. By the way, parliamentary systems have no need for an “impeachment” process: since the executive is dependent on the parliament anyway, all the parliament has to do is pass a vote of “no confidence,” the government falls, and there are new parliamentary elections.
The central institution of the Weimar Republic as a political system was its parliament, the Reichstag, the supreme lawmaking body in nation. As in other parliamentary systems, the Reichstag held a monopoly over legislative power at the national level, and was the source of all executive authority.
As head of state, the President of the Weimar Republic continued some of the functions of the Emperor under Germany’s old imperial constitution (1871-1918). In contrast to the Emperor, however, the presidency was primarily a symbolic and ceremonial office, and in most respects the president’s powers were fewer than the Emperor’s had been.
In addition to the Reichstag, the Weimar constitution provided for a legislative body that would represent the constituent states of Germany, rather like the U.S. Senate does. This was the Reichsrat (“Federal Council of States”). In constitutional form, it was the most obvious continuation of the old imperial constitution of 1871. Basically, the Reichsrat was a representation of state governments and functioned as a kind of upper house.
|Thüringen, Hessen, and the city-state of Hamburg:||2 each|
|All the rest :||1 each|
The Weimar constitution was generous with civil rights. It provided for equality before the law, and stated explicitly that men and women have the rights and duties as citizens (to this day, the U.S. has refused to enshrine the equality of the sexes in its constitution). Above all, this clause guaranteed women the vote. In addition, the Weimar constitution guaranteed
The Weimar constitution also provided social rights and protections that are not available under the American constitution:
The Electoral System
The Weimar republics electoral system was one of the most democratic on record: its framers were committed to the principle of one person, one vote and to proportional representation. According to the national Franchise Law of 27 April 1920, the nation was divided into 35 electoral districts. In elections, there would be 1 candidate chosen to represent every 60,000 voters, not “inhabitants” or “citizens.” The emphasis on voters was significant: it meant that the total number of delegates to the Reichstag would always fluctuate with voter turn-out. Because under women and young people aged 20-25 now had the right to vote, the size of the electorate doubled from 14,441,436 in 1912 (the last pre-World War I election) to 30,400,000 in 1919!
Proportional Representation: The voting system was designed to reflect the wishes of the electorate as accurately as possible—hence proportional representation. The voting system used in the U.S. is very different: its “winner-take-all” rule guarantees that the wishes of the electorate are not reflected with any precision. Under the proportional system, if 51% voted for Social Democratic candidates, for example, and 49% voted for candidates from the Nationalist party, then ideally 51% of the representatives should be Social Democrats and 49% Nationalists. Such an election result in the American system would produce a 100% Social Democratic delegation.
Voting by ‘Party List’: To achieve this, the electoral system established voting by “Party List.” As an elector, you would vote for a party, not a specific candidate. Instead, candidates are presented on a party list, with the order of candidates determined by the party leadership in each district. After the voting was over, election officials would count up the “party list” votes. The first “bloc” of 60,000 votes would go to the first candidate on the party list, the second “bloc” of 60,000 to candidate number two, the third cluster to number three, and so on. Thus, one’s position on the list was all-important!
The National List: After the election officials were done assigning 60,000-vote “blocs” to candidates on the “party list,” there were usually a certain number of votes left over. These “extra” mandates could be combined with left-overs from other electoral districts to create additional 60,000-vote “blocs.” For this purpose, each party also had a “National List” of candidates, who by this method could be elected to the Reichstag from no place in particular, as it were. But there were some limitations on this practice. No party, for example, was allowed to have more representatives from elected from the national list than it had from the districts. Thus, to get a Reichstag candidate elected from its “National List,” a party had to get at least 60,000 votes in at least one district. But this was not especially difficult to achieve.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Like any electoral system, this one had advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand, the Weimar system was exceptionally good at achieving its intended goal: reflecting the political will of the people as accurately as possible. Similarly, it prevented the formation of absolute majorities in the Reichstag. This may seem like a mixed blessing, but consider that if Germany had had our “winner-take-all” system, Adolf Hitler and the NSDAP would have obtained an absolute majority already in the summer of 1932.
But there were effects that also undermined the system’s overall stability:
By the same token, the Weimar Republic’s electoral system tended to weaken the personal bond between voters and their candidates. With no single-member constituencies, it was hard to know whom you were voting for. More and more, the system encouraged focussing political loyalties on parties, not people. And with candidates elected from the national list, the gap separating the electorate from their representatives was even greater. Finally, the Weimar Republic’s electoral system had an Achilles heal: like any democratic system, it was vulnerable to manipulation by anti-democratic parties, such as the Nazis, who from 1923 on sought to seize power through the ballot box.