University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
The History Collection

Page View

Military government weekly information bulletin
No. 42 (May 1946)

[Highlights of policy],   pp. 5-10 PDF (2.6 MB)


Page 7

miscellaneous small parties and groups
which were prominent in the January elec-
tions chiefly because 'the major parties
were not yet fully organized. In theApril
elections, party organization was much
more developed Consequently, voters
who in January supported independent,
non-partisan and miscellaneous candi-
dates now gave their votes to one of the
major parties. Thus in Bavaria, the April
vote for "others" fell ;off by  almost
700,000 while at the same time, the
Christian Social Union gained about
350,000- and the Social Democratic Party
about 75,000.
In this connection, a further obslerva-
tion should be made about the so-called
independent, non-partisan and miscella-
neous vote in January. Of the 23,876 Ge-
meinde councilmen in four of Bavaria's
five Regierungsbezirke who in January
were elected as independents, non-par-
tisan and miscellaneous, 6,632 were found
to belong to the Christian Social Union
and an additional 4,030 belonged to the
Social Democratic Party. This means that
the real vote for both of these parties
in the January elections in Bavaria was
greater than the official figures show.
The same is doubtlessly true of the other
Laender. From   this it can   be said
that the major parties gained in
the April as compared to' the Januray
elections, but the net gain is less than the
figures indicate for the reason just stated.
There iare two exceptions to this gen-
leralization. The vote.of the LibleralDem-
ocratic Party in Bavaria declined, prob-
ably because of factional squabbles with-
in the party. The decline of the Social
Democratic vote in Greater Hessle -from
484,715 to 455,574 - is more difficult
to explain. It is significant to note that
the Social Democratic loss in Greater
Hesse is approximately the same as the
Communist Party gain. This does not
prove conclusively that Social Democra-
tic voters switched to the Communist
ticket but it does raise a query. Another
explanation which has been advanced is
that, in many Hessian Gemeinden last
January, the SPD had little or no com-
petition from the other parties. In the
April elections, the CDU gave the SPD
real competition, whereas in January
there was often no CDU ticket at all. Ac-
Bavaria      | Greater Hesse    | Wuerttemberg-
l-____________  l________________  I  _________ _-  |_  1B  ad en   0
Party       Election     Votes    of total  Votes     of total  Votes   
of total
received   vote    received    vote    received   vote
CDU/CSU        January      901,392   43.20/| 341,1 90   30%/   | 242,131
  30.81o|
CDU, CSU       April       1,258,189  69,40/0  392,576   37.90/%  313,276
  47.4°/o
SPD            January      336,878   16%/o    484,715   420/0    158,410
  200/0
SPD            April        414,921   22.9%/o  455,574   44/      165,688
  25.10/o
LDP/IDPP       January        19,748   0.90/0|  25,002    2o/   |  54,510
   70/0
LDP/DPP        April          9,558    0.50/0   64,253    6.2O/    69,778
  10.50/0
KPD            January       46,247    20/.     60,886    5.40/o   29,653
   3.80/o
KPD            April         71,097    3.90/0   86,593    8.30/o   37,740
   5.70/0
OTHERS         January      757,512   360/o    173,647   150/o    291,878
  370/0
UTHERS         April         58,458    3.2("/   35,073    3.30/o   73,359
  11.10/0
Fig. 2. Comparicon of party strength in the January and April elections by
Land
7


Go up to Top of Page