The vote paves the way for the entry into the government coalition of Yisrael Beinteinu, the party that made this bill a condition for its entry into the government coalition.
Just seven weeks ago, Yisrael Beiteinu leader MK Avigdor Lieberman announced that he would join a national unity government only on five conditions. These included a change in the political system, the establishment of an official investigative committee into the mishandling of the recent war in Lebanon, and the non-destruction of Jewish outpost neighborhoods in Judea and Samaria. Most of these conditions are not being fulfilled, yet Lieberman appears on his way into the government.
Even the issue of the political system was no longer a deal-breaker for Lieberman. "There is not necessarily a connection between the government's vote on the law," he said beforehand, "and our decision whether to join the coalition. It's not the decisive consideration."
The main feature of the proposed changes, as voted upon today, is a switch to a presidential system, in which the president is elected every four years and is not dependent on a majority in the Knesset. The changes also include a stipulation that Cabinet ministers cannot serve simultaneously as Knesset Members, and a rise in the minimum voter support that a party needs in order to be represented in the Knesset.
It had been previously decided, by a vote in the ministerial committee for legislation, that the Cabinet would back the legislation - but the narrow vote was contested by Labor's Eitan Cabel, and a full Cabinet vote was therefore held today. Kadima voted in favor, while Labor and Shas were against. The Pensioners continued their mixed approach on the bill, expressing opposition but voting in favor; one of its two ministers voted for the bill, while the other one abstained.
Shas Chairman Minister Eli Yeshai said that efforts to stabilize the ruling system is desirable, "but it should be done in coordination with all the Knesset factions. After more than 50 years of statehood, let us not make superficial changes that will take us another 50 years to repair."
Prof. Arik Carmon, head of the Israel Institute for Democracy, wrote in B'Sheva last week that a presidential system in Israel "is not an option, as it has grave dangers for democracy." He feels that unlike in the U.S., where the president's powers are balanced by the individual states' powers, in Israel, too much power will be invested in one man, disenfranchising the supporters of the many small parties and worsening the gaps between the sectors.
Prof. Moshe Koppel of Bar Ilan University was also asked by B'Sheva to opine on the proposed changes. "We are far from being the United States," he wrote, "which is almost the only country in which the presidential system has succeeded. Unfortunately, our political culture and the blurred borders separating between the military and civilian [sectors] are more reminiscent of South America, where the perpetual tensions between the legislature and the president, without appropriate release-points, has led to dictatorships (in Ecuador, for instance) or to military coups (such as in Chile). If we want stability and a separation of powers, there are simpler and better solutions than changing over to a presidential system. Making it harder to dissolve the Knesset would bring stability, and passing the Norwegian Law, according to which an MK must resign from the Knesset before he can become a minister, would bring about a separation of powers."
Dr. Reuven Hazan of Hebrew University wrote for B'Sheva: "We can list several aspects of a democratic country: rule of law, control over corruption, representation for various social sectors, political participation, fewer social gaps, and more. If we take the world's 60 leading democracies, half of which are parliamentary democracies and half of which are presidential, we will see that by and large, the presidential systems receive lower scores than the parliamentary states in every parameter... True, the average duration between elections in a presidential system is 3.8 years, instead of 3.4 years for a parliamentary system - but this is the only parameter, and only saves a few months between elections..."
Just seven weeks ago, Yisrael Beiteinu leader MK Avigdor Lieberman announced that he would join a national unity government only on five conditions. These included a change in the political system, the establishment of an official investigative committee into the mishandling of the recent war in Lebanon, and the non-destruction of Jewish outpost neighborhoods in Judea and Samaria. Most of these conditions are not being fulfilled, yet Lieberman appears on his way into the government.
Even the issue of the political system was no longer a deal-breaker for Lieberman. "There is not necessarily a connection between the government's vote on the law," he said beforehand, "and our decision whether to join the coalition. It's not the decisive consideration."
The main feature of the proposed changes, as voted upon today, is a switch to a presidential system, in which the president is elected every four years and is not dependent on a majority in the Knesset. The changes also include a stipulation that Cabinet ministers cannot serve simultaneously as Knesset Members, and a rise in the minimum voter support that a party needs in order to be represented in the Knesset.
It had been previously decided, by a vote in the ministerial committee for legislation, that the Cabinet would back the legislation - but the narrow vote was contested by Labor's Eitan Cabel, and a full Cabinet vote was therefore held today. Kadima voted in favor, while Labor and Shas were against. The Pensioners continued their mixed approach on the bill, expressing opposition but voting in favor; one of its two ministers voted for the bill, while the other one abstained.
Shas Chairman Minister Eli Yeshai said that efforts to stabilize the ruling system is desirable, "but it should be done in coordination with all the Knesset factions. After more than 50 years of statehood, let us not make superficial changes that will take us another 50 years to repair."
Prof. Arik Carmon, head of the Israel Institute for Democracy, wrote in B'Sheva last week that a presidential system in Israel "is not an option, as it has grave dangers for democracy." He feels that unlike in the U.S., where the president's powers are balanced by the individual states' powers, in Israel, too much power will be invested in one man, disenfranchising the supporters of the many small parties and worsening the gaps between the sectors.
Prof. Moshe Koppel of Bar Ilan University was also asked by B'Sheva to opine on the proposed changes. "We are far from being the United States," he wrote, "which is almost the only country in which the presidential system has succeeded. Unfortunately, our political culture and the blurred borders separating between the military and civilian [sectors] are more reminiscent of South America, where the perpetual tensions between the legislature and the president, without appropriate release-points, has led to dictatorships (in Ecuador, for instance) or to military coups (such as in Chile). If we want stability and a separation of powers, there are simpler and better solutions than changing over to a presidential system. Making it harder to dissolve the Knesset would bring stability, and passing the Norwegian Law, according to which an MK must resign from the Knesset before he can become a minister, would bring about a separation of powers."
Dr. Reuven Hazan of Hebrew University wrote for B'Sheva: "We can list several aspects of a democratic country: rule of law, control over corruption, representation for various social sectors, political participation, fewer social gaps, and more. If we take the world's 60 leading democracies, half of which are parliamentary democracies and half of which are presidential, we will see that by and large, the presidential systems receive lower scores than the parliamentary states in every parameter... True, the average duration between elections in a presidential system is 3.8 years, instead of 3.4 years for a parliamentary system - but this is the only parameter, and only saves a few months between elections..."