Skip to content

Where are you from?

Choose your province and we will tell you how the deputies and senators you elected vote, one by one.

 

We remember it in this browser. If you create an account, we keep it there.

Type a law, a topic, a person or a province.

What it is

Proposal to reform Spain's electoral law: more proportional seats, debates, and directly elected provincial councils

Admitted step 2 of 7 · Unfinished

It is a members’ bill. Introduced by parliamentary groups, the Senate, regional governments or citizens. It was introduced on 7 February 2023. Introduced by: Grupo Parlamentario Ciudadanos.

Official title: Private member's bill for an Organic Law amending Organic Law 5/1985, of 19 June, on the General Electoral System.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, file 122/000298· updated 11 Nov

Automatic summary, not yet reviewed

  1. The bill would lower the minimum number of members of Congress per province to one, distribute the rest by population, and replace the current seat allocation formula with a largest-remainder method, making the system more proportional.
  2. The bill would change Senate elections: each mainland province would be split into four districts, each electing one senator through a single transferable vote system, where voters rank candidates until someone wins a majority.
  3. The bill would have provincial council members elected by universal, direct, secret suffrage, in a separate ballot, instead of the current indirect system through city councilors.
  4. The bill would require at least two mandatory debates during the campaign among the parties running, broadcast on the public television channel with nationwide coverage, which must share the signal with anyone who requests it.
  5. The bill would tighten polling rules: more technical disclosure requirements, higher fines, and prison sentences for anyone who falsifies a poll or knowingly spreads a fake one. It would also shorten the pre-election polling blackout to the two days before voting.
  6. The bill would set elections held at the end of a term by default on the sixth Sunday after the term expires, avoiding Christmas and Easter week, and would punish with prison anyone who blocks the calling or publication of the election decree. It would also have AIReF Independent Authority for Fiscal Responsibility, a public body that monitors the sustainability of public finances. evaluate parties' economic programs.

Who it affects

  • Political parties and candidates: They would have to take part in at least two campaign debates, meet stricter gender balance rules on candidate lists, and face tougher fines and prison terms for falsifying polls or blocking election calls.
  • Voters: Their votes for Congress would translate into seats more proportionally, they would rank Senate candidates by preference, and they could see party economic programs evaluated by AIReF.
  • Provincial councils (Diputaciones Provinciales): Their members would be elected directly by citizens instead of the current indirect system.
  • Polling companies and media outlets: They would face more transparency duties about their clients and technical details, with fines up to €100,000, tripled in the final week before the election.
  • The Government and regional presidents: Elections at the end of a term would have a fixed Sunday date, with automatic adjustments if it falls at Christmas or Easter.

Words worth knowing

Voto único transferible (single transferable vote)
A system where voters rank candidates by preference. If no one reaches the threshold, the lowest candidate is eliminated and their votes transfer to the next preference, repeating until someone is elected.
Fórmula de restos mayores (largest-remainder method)
A seat allocation method: seats are first assigned by whole quotients, and remaining seats go to parties with the largest remainders, which is more proportional than the current system.
Circunscripción electoral (electoral district)
The territorial division used to allocate seats; votes are counted within each of these districts.
AIReF
Independent Authority for Fiscal Responsibility, a public body that monitors the sustainability of public finances.
Silencio demoscópico (polling blackout)
The ban on publishing voting-intention polls in the days before an election.

It summarizes the text as it was introduced. It is written by artificial intelligence and may contain mistakes: the official text is what counts. Read the official text · How we make summaries

Where it stands

How far did it get?

It took 2 of 7 steps. It reached Admitted, and today it is unfinished.

  1. Introduced7 February 2023Someone registers the text in the Congreso.
  2. Admitted14 February 2023The Bureau of the Congreso accepts it and, for a members’ bill, the plenary decides whether to consider it.
  3. Amendmentsnot reachedGroups propose changes.
  4. Committeenot reachedA committee goes through the text in detail.
  5. Plenarynot reachedAll 350 deputies vote.
  6. Senatenot reachedThe Senate can pass it, amend it or veto it.
  7. BOEnot reachedIt is published in the Official State Gazette (BOE) and comes into force.
See the 6 official steps on a timeline
Feb 2023Mar 2023Apr 202311. 7 February 2023: Presentación22. 14 February 2023: Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales Publicación desde 14/02/2023 hasta 17/02/202333. 14 February 2023: Calificación44. 17 February 2023: Gobierno Contestación desde 17/02/2023 hasta 27/03/202355. 27 March 2023: Pleno Toma en consideración desde 27/03/2023 hasta 30/05/202366. 30 May 2023: Concluido - (Caducado) desde 30/05/2023 hasta 16/06/2023

Was there a plenary vote?

We have no plenary vote linked to this law in the Congreso’s data.

What happens next

What happens now?

The legislature ended before it finished. To go on, someone would have to introduce it again in the new Cortes.

It has not been presented again yet.

Presented before in:

Sources

Where does all this come from?

  • The data comes from the open files of the Congreso, the Senate and the BOE, unaltered.
  • Each deputy’s province is the one of their seat on the day of the vote.
  • We only say “passed” or “rejected” when the majority needed is certain; otherwise we say which side had more votes.