Coalition Predictions Scorecard - and more

In a previous posting, Post-Election Game Theory, I laid out my predictions for how the coalition would look.  With the new government finally having been sworn in, after way more haggling than anyone expected, let's go back now and see how I did, only mentioning areas where I specifically went out on a limb.

1. Tachlis: I predicted a government composed of Likud, Yesh Atid, Bayit Yehudi and Kadima.  I was out by one: the Tzipi Livni Movement instead of Kadima.  (Or is that in addition to Kadima?  Nobody in the media seems to know - or care - whether Kadima is in or out of the coalition.  Me neither.)  
2. Labor: despite Netanyahu's sincere efforts to woo Yecimovich into the coalition, she stuck by her guns, as I predicted.
3. Bayit Yehudi: despite some very bad blood between them (apparently worse than I thought originally), Bibi finally had to bring Bennett into the government.  He really didn't want to, but like I said, the numbers just didn't work otherwise.
4. Shas: could conceivably have overcome their incompatibility issues with Yesh Atid by looking for compromises, but instead chose to dig in to their trenches, and now find themselves with no say in how the "sharing the burden" debate plays out.  Merubeh tafasta, lo tafasta - try get too much, and you end up with nothing.  I wish I had been wrong about that prediction, but I wasn't.
5. UTJ, while less strident in their rhetoric than Shas, also chose the route of conflict.  Pity, but also a clear call.
6. Tzippi Livni: this is the only one that completely blindsided me.  I was totally gobsmacked when Netanyahu cut the first deal with Livni, especially with her as lead negotiator with the Palestinians.  I think he thinks putting her into that position is going to teach her some stark lessons in reality, as in "Good luck with that!" - but frankly I'm quite afraid that she will be able to do Israel a lot of damage from that position. But given that she was included, it makes Kadima's piddly 2 mandates completely inconsequential, and therefore wasteful to include them in the coalition.

So it wasn't a 100% score, but still not too bad.  And from that position, I'm going to make a few more predictions.

1. Tzippi Livni won't last long in the government.  She can't.  Her pet issue is making a peace agreement with the Palestinians, and she will be unable to do so, for any number of reasons.  Either the Palestinians will continue to refuse flat-out to return to negotiations and continue on the unilateral track, or they will only come back to that table on condition that Israel in principle agrees to roll over and die as a precondition for restarting talks.  Livni will probably accept any preconditions they want, but she will be overruled by the rest of the coalition - or at least, I hope so.  Furthermore, with Bayit Yehudi controlling the Construction Ministry, and Moshe Yaalon as Minister of Defense, sooner or later Livni is going to proclaim that peace is just not achievable while we continue to "provoke" the Palestinians by allowing the residents of Efrat to enclose their verandas and instructing the army to actually defend themselves against Molotov cocktails rather than running away, and she will resign in a huff, doing as much damage as possible in the international arena on her way out, and try her hand (again) at Opposition politics.  I don't think we'll have to wait a year for that to happen, maybe as little as six months.  
2. The burden will be shared, and it will be done intelligently and fairly.  (Now that's going out on a limb!)  Shas and UTJ are spoiling for a fight; they will threaten that all the Haredim will go to jail rather than serve in the army; and they will be disappointed.  There will be no imprisonments, no arrests, not even skirmishes.  The government will simply enact a set of financial rules that will give attractive economic benefits to people who complete the army or other national service, not much for people who are officially exempted (e.g. new immigrants), and an extra tax on people who refuse to serve.  The Haredim will not be given the option of being public heroes and dramatically going to jail; instead they will have the much harder choice between doing national service and getting the concomitant economic benefits, or refusing and quietly going the long haul with an onerous tax burden.  Faced with this dilemma, I believe the rank and file will vote with their feet, and despite the pashkevillin that will be plastered over every vertical surface in Mea Shearim and Bnei Brak, screaming about how this is a milchemes mitzva and a chillul Hashem to do any kind of national service, a very large number of Haredim will go along with the new system.  It will certainly beat the indentured poverty into which the old system forces them.
3. The government can fall in one of two ways: either Yesh Atid falls off the Left flank, or Bayit Yehudi falls off the Right.  The only way I can think of that Yair Lapid will be sufficiently outraged as to walk out of the government would be if the government fails to implement a "sharing the burden" plan.  If he ever does quit the government, it won't hurt Bibi, because the Haredi parties will be lined up to take his place - and that might result in the undoing of said plan.  Lapid is in this coalition for the long haul, and his negotiating power is weak, because 19 mandates notwithstanding, he is replaceable.
4. Bennett, on the other hand, is less constrained by such considerations, because he truly is irreplaceable   If Bibi ventures too far Left, Bennett can threaten to bring down the government.  The Haredim will not replace them in a coalition with Lapid.  And around 75% of the Likud MKs themselves will agree with Bennett.  Unlike the 2005 Disengagement government, the vast majority of the Likud MKs are now strong ideologues who will themselves vote no-confidence in the government if Bibi tries to do a Sharon on us.  Even if Bibi tries to get Labor involved, it just can't work out.  Result: no more insane concessions to the Palestinians, and Tzippi Livni will quit the coalition (see above).  So Bennett really is sitting pretty.
5. As a result of the above considerations, absent any "black swan" events, I'm calling that this coalition will see out its full term of office.  That will be a first!

All told, I'm pretty optimistic about this government.  The common thread between the major coalition parties is that they're security wise, free market supporters with a non-coercive approach.  I think on the whole things are looking up for Israel.

Your thoughts?

The real reason why politicians don't want directly elected MKs

For a long time I've been struggling to understand why we persist with the Proportional Representation (PR) system here in Israel, despite its obvious weakness, in that it rewards small splinter parties, giving them disproportionate power in determining the composition of the government coalition.  It seems totally obvious that having directly elected district representatives, like in the USA and UK, would lead not only to more stable governments, but also to more responsibility on the individual MK to serve the public who elected them faithfully.

I first came to the conclusion that it was simple political cynicism: the people who would have to vote to change to directly elected MKs are the same MKs currently protected by the obscurity of party lists, so they are not held accountable for anything, and they can continue their ride on the gravy train without having to lift a finger.

But it still doesn't add up.  Even high performing politicians, and even the larger parties are still shifting and dodging and pushing direct elections off the agenda.  These are the people who stand to gain the most from direct elections!  There has to be some other reason...

And then I realized... it's actually quite obvious when you think about it, but it can't really be said out loud, as you will see.  I am going to say it out loud anyway.  The Powers That Be have plausible deniability, so I can say all the things they're likely thinking but can't say for themselves, and they will deny that this is their reasoning, even though it is.

Under the system of PR, MKs are elected according to the number of votes cast, more or less proportionately, though not exactly, because of certain kinks in the formula such as the minimum threshold and vote-sharing agreements.

If, however, we had to switch to district representatives, you would have to draw up districts.  While those districts could not practically all have the exact same number of registered voters in each, there would at least have to be approximately the same size.  Did you see the catch?  Registered voters, not votes cast.

Do you see the problem now?  I'll spell it out: the difference is in the Arab sector.  In today's Knesset, there are 11 representatives of Arab parties, including Chadash, which is actually more communist than Arab, but as part of the anti-Zionist bloc they depend heavily on Arab votes.  That's less than 10% of the Knesset.  In reality, Arabs make up roughly 20% of Israel's population - but since they typically have very low voter turnout, they are also very under-represented in the Knesset.  If, however, we had to draw up voting districts according to registered voters, without some significant gerrymandering, the Arab districts would make up closer to 20% of the Knesset.  That's enough to make any pro-Zionist think twice about switching to district representation.

And yet, I'm still in favor of making the change.  If you really do believe in democracy, then trust in the system.  There are a large number of benefits that would come about through directly elected representatives.

Firstly, having district representatives who are directly answerable to the people who elected them means they will have to work to better the lives of their constituents - including the Arab ones.  So if the MK for Umm-el-Fahm spends his tenure ranting about the evils of the Zionists and going on missions to Iran and Turkey to whip up more hatred - and doesn't do basic stuff like making sure that Umm-el-Fahm gets enough municipal budget to maintain the roads, build parks etc., then next time around his voters will kick him out.  I can even imagine Shas putting up candidates in the Arab towns, because they have a strong reputation for fighting for the lower classes.  Wouldn't that be funny?

Secondly, I'm not afraid of having more Arab MKs.  Right now, the Arab bloc is problematic, because their strident anti-Zionism precludes them from joining any coalition, which makes government building more difficult.  With directly elected MKs, though, the chances of even needing a coalition are very slim.  Immediately, all the single-issue parties like Tzippi Livni, Kadima, Otzma Leyisrael, Green Leaf etc. would be wiped out.  Parties like UTJ, whose support is very concentrated in specific areas, would only be able to win seats (albeit by huge margins) in their own strongholds, but overall, their strength would take a hit.  And the big winners would be the big parties, the ones who have a serious track record of governance.  It's quite likely that a single party - probably the Likud - would elect enough MKs to make the government all by itself.

Now, wouldn't that be a good thing?

What do you think?