The state of Israel was declared in 1948 after the end of the British Mandate of Palestine, sparking a yearlong war over the state’s existence (Mahler, 2010: 41). Despite the turmoil, the newly created state designed and implemented its own legislature and held an election even as the war was still going on across the country. The Legislature called the Knesset, after an ancient Jewish tradition, became the ruling body of the State of Israel for the next 67 years. This essay will examine the Knesset looking at four main factor, the origins of the house, how a bill becomes law, its representation of various demographics, and attempts at reforming the house.
The origins of the Knesset begins way back in 500 BCE with a body called the Knesset …show more content…
To that extent this essay will look at the demographics of the Knesset, through the lens of parties, and of people as it stands currently. As one would expect from Israel, the largest minority demographic in Israel is the Arab population, which currently makes up 20% of the state’s population. This is close to the number of Arabs currently sitting, but still a bit short at 14% representation in the Knesset. Fairing much worse is the percentage of women currently sitting, at 23%, well below the average of around 50% population. In a country so deeply rooted in religion it is also important to look at the religious aspect, with 21% ultra-orthodox or orthodox Jews, which is actually lower than in previous Knessets (Harkov, 2015). Finally, it should be noted that there are currently no openly LGBT members of the Knesset, but there was at least one in the previous Knesset, who chose voluntarily not to run again (Cohen, …show more content…
Generally speaking these are either government reform, or electoral reform. With electoral reform many of the suggested reforms had to do with changing the voting system from the current one district party list system, to ones where individual district and countries have more say, such as splitting up the country into 120 districts that each vote, or a mixed-member system where half the MKs are based on party list, and half on districts, but so far no reform has remained popular (Knesset.gov, 2008). The other types of reform have more to do with the somewhat chaotic nature of the Knesset. Due to the large number of parties, and views, forming government and maintaining the confidence of the house has proved difficult, leading some to argue that the Knesset would be better served by making it easier to form coalitions and become governments, and to disentangle the budget bills from motions of confidence. The argument being these changes would allow for a more stable Knesset, with fewer disruptions (Plesner and Rahat, 2015:
The origins of the Knesset begins way back in 500 BCE with a body called the Knesset …show more content…
To that extent this essay will look at the demographics of the Knesset, through the lens of parties, and of people as it stands currently. As one would expect from Israel, the largest minority demographic in Israel is the Arab population, which currently makes up 20% of the state’s population. This is close to the number of Arabs currently sitting, but still a bit short at 14% representation in the Knesset. Fairing much worse is the percentage of women currently sitting, at 23%, well below the average of around 50% population. In a country so deeply rooted in religion it is also important to look at the religious aspect, with 21% ultra-orthodox or orthodox Jews, which is actually lower than in previous Knessets (Harkov, 2015). Finally, it should be noted that there are currently no openly LGBT members of the Knesset, but there was at least one in the previous Knesset, who chose voluntarily not to run again (Cohen, …show more content…
Generally speaking these are either government reform, or electoral reform. With electoral reform many of the suggested reforms had to do with changing the voting system from the current one district party list system, to ones where individual district and countries have more say, such as splitting up the country into 120 districts that each vote, or a mixed-member system where half the MKs are based on party list, and half on districts, but so far no reform has remained popular (Knesset.gov, 2008). The other types of reform have more to do with the somewhat chaotic nature of the Knesset. Due to the large number of parties, and views, forming government and maintaining the confidence of the house has proved difficult, leading some to argue that the Knesset would be better served by making it easier to form coalitions and become governments, and to disentangle the budget bills from motions of confidence. The argument being these changes would allow for a more stable Knesset, with fewer disruptions (Plesner and Rahat, 2015: