| |
Abstract: Romania. Electoral Geography (November-December, 2004). The parliamentary and presidential election took place in 28th of November 2005 (the first count tour) and in 12th of December 2005 (the second count tour). In the first count tour, the total number of electors placed on the electoral lists was 18 449 344, the presence at the polls being of 58,51 % (10 794 653 voters), from these the votes validly expressed representing 94,38 % for the Deputies’ Chamber, those 10 188 106 votes validly expressed have been granted in a proportion exceeding 87 % to four of the claimants for this room, as follows: The SDP + URP National Unit (36,80 %), The “Justice and Truth NLP-DP” Alliance (31,48 %), The Great Romania Party (12,99 %) and The Hungarian Democrat Union of Romania (6,19 %), which joint in the Romania’s Parliament, too, while the rest of 49 formations (from the total of 53) managed to gather only 12,54 % from the electorate’s options. On the basis of those results, after the redistribution of other formations’ votes (12,54 %) to those four that joint the Parliament (for 314 deputies), at which were added those 18 deputies belonging to the national minorities, was reached at the next configuration of the Deputies’ Chamber: The SDP + URP National Unit 132 deputies (114 SDP and 18 URP), The “J.T. NLP-DP” Alliance 112 (63 NLP and 48 DP), GRP 48, HDUR 22 and national minorities 18 (fig. 1). The second chamber of Parliament – Senate – has 137 representatives, for whose election the votes validly expressed were 10 231 476, these being distributed, successively, to the following formations: The SDP + URP National Unit (37,16 %), The “Justice and Truth NLP-DP” Alliance (31,80 %), The Great Romania Party (13,64 %) and The Hungarian Democrat Union of Romania (6,23 %), those four brought together 88,83 % from the total, and the rest of 11,17 % revert to the ”Others” category. The mentioned results, after the redistribution of the votes to the ”Others” category, led to the establishing of the senators’ number for those four formations that joint the Parliament: The SDP + URP National Unit, with 57 senators (46 for SDP and 11 for URP), The “J.T. NLP-DP” Alliance, with 49 senators (30 NLP and 19 DP), The Great Romania Party with 21 senators and The Hungarian Democrat Union in Romania, with 10 senators (fig. 3). In order to choose the Romania’s President, in the first count tour, at which 12 candidates participated, those 10 452 205 votes validly expressed led to the establishing of the next position: Adrian Năstase (40,94 %), Traian Băsescu (33,92 %), Corneliu Vadim Tudor (12,57 %), Marko Bela (5,10 %), Gheorghe Coriolan Ciuhandu (1,90 %), George Becali (1,77 %), Petre Roman (1,35 %), Gheorghe Dinu (1,08 %), Marian Petre Miluţ (0,42 %), Ovidiu Tudorici (0,36 %), Aurel Rădulescu (0,34 %) and Alexandru Raj Tunaru (0,26 %). At the second count tour (12th of December 2005), the electoral lists comprised, for the presidential election, a number of 18 316 104 with a right to vote, from which 10 112 262 electors were present at the polls, respectively 55,21 % (compared with 58,50 % at the first tour). After counting the electorate’s options, the existence of 10 008 314 votes validly expressed was ascertained, from which 5 126 794 (51,23 %) were attributed to the nominee Traian Băsescu (the occupant of the second place in the first count tour), and 4 881 520 (48,77 %) revert to Adrian Năstase (who hold the first place at the first tour). By comparing the number of votes validly expressed, it is to be noticed that the second count tour was extremely tight, the difference between the two nominees being of just 245 274 votes, respectively of 2,46 % (fig. 5 B). The study of the elections at the level of the geographical-historical provinces, in a condition of a maximum generalization, shows that the SDP + URP Alliance registered the best results, at the Deputies Chamber and Senate, in Moldavia, Muntenia, Oltenia and Crişana-Maramureş, while the constituency of the “Justice and Truth NLP-DP” Alliance was given by Bucharest Municipality, Transylvania, Banat and Dobrogea. As concerns the election of the country’s president, the situation was approximately the same. |
|
