Revised Post

Israel’s legislative body, the Knesset, has 120 members. Members are selected by proportional representation meaning that Knesset seats are divided by the percentage of the overall vote each party receives. As long as a party receives over two percent of the vote, that party is eligible for a Knesset seat.

Currently, the largest party in the Knesset is the Kadima party. Kadima has 28 seats in the Knesset. Despite its size, Kadima has almost no influence on policy. How is it that the largest party in Israel can have essentially no influence on the government?

Kadima does not have influence because it is not part of the governing coalition. Under the leadership of Benjamin Netanyahu, the Likud party formed a governing coalition with five other parties. These five parties posses 74 seats in the Knesset. As a result, smaller parties are able to exert more policy influence than Kadima.

The Kadima party is holding a primary election on March 27^th. Three candidates are competing for the party leadership position. Avi Dichter is running for Kadima Party Chairman on the platform that if he is elected, then he will make every effort to join Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition. Dichter argues that it is extremely important to join Netanyahu’s coalition so that Kadima can have at least some impact on central issues. (http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=257490).

Tzipi Livni and Shaul Mofaz are the other candidates for the Kadima party chairman. Both of them have made it clear that they do not intend to compromise with Netanyahu. However, Livni and Mofaz still argue that Kadima needs to confront and beat Netanyahu’s coalition. Research shows that Kadima is likely to lose half of its seats in the Knesset. (http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/livni-sets-kadima-primary-for-late-march-as-party-rivals-ramp-up-rhetoric-1.408060 ).

It seems that ,Dichter may be the only one that can guarantee voters at least some influence. However, Dichter has little support and the primary is seen mostly as a contest between Livni and Mofaz. However, this puzzling scenario makes more sense if you consider the theory of Hinich and Munger in “Ideology, Candidate Strategy, and the Theory of Elections”. They claim that candidates need to do two things for voters:

1. 1.Provide promises of what they will do when they are elected.

2. 2.Provide proof that they are committed to their vision

Members of the Kadima party are unwilling to support Dichter because he is not complying with the second principle. Voters cannot be sure if Dichter is committed to the party’s vision. The other two candidates propose an ideological alternative to the current government. Dichter on the other hand, promises to blend Kadima’s liberal views with the right wing coalition. Voters are uncomfortable supporting someone with a weak ideological tie, because voters often worry that politicians will do whatever they want once elected. If candidate’s have a clear ideological tie, then voters are better able to predict what that candidate will do in office. Even when faced with unforeseeable circumstances, voters have a pretty good idea what a candidate with a clear ideology will do. Dichter is unlikely to win the primary election because voters see him as less predictable.