What is a constituency? It is physically impossible that millions of voters in a country could assemble at one place and cast their votes en msse, or know all candidates or go long distances to vote. Owing to these considerations, the whole territory of the State is divided into many electoral areas or districts, called the constituencies. A constituency is, therefore, such an electoral area whose voters cast their votes at one place and elects one or more candidates as their representatives. If a single representative is elected, it is called a single-member constituency, also called the District System. If several representatives are elected it is called a multiple member constituency, also called General Ticket System. In case of a single-member constituency system, the country is divided into as many electoral districts as there are the members of the legislature to be elected .Each voter has one vote, as he has to elect one member only. In the case of the multiple member constituency system, the electoral areas are comparatively much fewer in number but much bigger in size, as each of them elect several representatives. Each voter has as many votes as the members to be elected. At present most of the States have the single member or district system. Merits of the Single Member System.
It enables the voters to remain in touch with the candidates and
the representatives.
The single member constituency is necessarily small in size and population. This fact enables the voters to know well the candidates and the representatives whom they elect. Large sized constituencies of the General Ticket system do not possess this advantage. Hence the interest of constituency are better looked after in the District System than in the General Ticket System At the same time a representative can nurse his constituency better if it is smaller than a large and populous.
It is more economical and simple.
This system has the advantages of simplicity, convenience and onomy. The voter can cast his single vote easily and intelligently in the •mall-sized constituency. The administrative expenses are also less, and the counting of votes is more convenient than under the General Ticket System.
It has the advantages of responsibility and stability.
The single-member constituency method ensures the responsibility of the votes when they choose their representative. It also intensifies his interest and responsibility towards his electors so that he may win re- election on the next occasion. At the same time, experience has shown that this system provides a more stable majority in the legislature, for a single political party usually wins majority of seats in it. On the other hand, under the multiple members system, several parties emerge in the elections because each of them can win some seats. This divides the legislature into several groups and parties and weakens the executive, for a stable coalition ministry cannot be formed. That is why the single-member system is favoured in the parliamentary form of government.
It encourages local talent.
The single member district system favours local interest and local talent. The constituency is small and therefore comparatively poorer candidates can contest with confidence and less expenses. They can hope to win local support from the people who know them well. Thus local talent is encouraged. Moreover, as the representative is in close contact with his constituents, he seeks to promote local interests. In the large-sized constituencies of the multiple member system, neither local interest nor local talent can be adequately recognised.
Disadvantages of the Single Member System
It unduly favours government candidates.
In small constituencies the government can easily influence the voters in favour of its own candidates. This was demonstrated by French experience.
It encourages localism in politics.
Under this system, local interests are emphasized at the expense of the national interests. The voters as well as the representatives are more devoted to their local conditions and needs than to national affairs. Thus it encourages localism in politics. This fact is proved by Italian and French experience.
It narrows the range of choice of candidates.
As this system is usually coupled with the residential qualification, it narrows the range of choice of the candidates who must come from within the electoral area. The result is that sometimes inferior candidates only remain to contest the election. But Gilchrist rejects this argument. He says that in the present age of universal education, “it is not easy for second rate men or women to be elected.”
It necessitates constant readjustment of electoral area.
Population in small-sized constituencies changes frequently. It, therefore, necessitates frequent readjustments of the boundaries of the electoral areas. On the other hand, population increases or decreases in large-sized constituencies of the multiple member system are immaterial and need no redefinition of electoral boundaries.
It encourages gerrymandering.
Owing to the need for readjustment of the boundaries of electoral districts the single-member system encourages gerrymandering on the part of the ruling majority parties. It means that they define the boundaries of the electoral districts in such a way as to give the majority party more votes than it would otherwise win on its voting strength. This defect is particularly found in the U.S.A. where the practice of gerrymandering first began.
It distorts the whole representation system by establishing minority governments.
One of the chief defects of the single member system is that it returns such a party in majority which represents the minority of the whole electorate. It is often observed that the party which has secured majority of seats in the legislature is really supported by minority of voters in the nation. Thus this system distorts the real purpose of representation by setting up minority government. This fact is noticed in almost all democratic States. For instance, in India the Congress Party ruled the country, although it secured only 38% to 42% votes in (the General ‘Elections of 1952 1957 and in recent years.
It does not provide proper representation to the minorities.
It gives only some representation to the minorities, but not proper representation to them in accordance with their voting strength. The minority parties secure more votes in the election as a whole but lesser seats in the legislature. The reason is this: as each constituency elects only one representative, the candidate who secure majority of votes in it may have really won less votes than those of all his defeated opponents taken together. Hence the majority party in the legislature is really a minority party among the electorate. The minority parties also fail to get proper representation in the legislature in proportion to their voting strength in the election.