For the first time in recent memory the football halftime show did not suck. Paul did a great job and it was classy and exactly what American prime-time family entertainment should be. Coming soon… Traditionalists, Neocons, Libertarians… the party we called the GOP.

This post is not to detract from the more than warranted jubilation over the Iraqi voter turnout, but we need to temper our enthusiasm with a sober look at what type of government the Iraqis elected. To make a long story short, it appears to me that we gave Iraq the worst possible electoral system that they could get.

The basic problem with the Iraqi electoral system is that it is a Proportional Representation (PR) system that was set up by the Euro-schmucks at the UN. PR is the love-child of small Scandanavian countries and France because it is the most “representative” and “equal” electoral system out there. Liberals love PR, Conservatives hate it. This book will give you a good idea of the types of people that favor PR and those that do not. The reason Euros like it is because it gives representation to everyone, including Communists. Stick to the party line comrade.

The basic problem with PR specifically in Iraq is that it will breed radicalism. For an excellent critique by AEI scholar Michael Rubin, click here. PR breeds radicalism by placing supreme loyalty with the party instead of with the people. There are no individual districts, like US congressional districts, where individual representatives have responsibility to a specific group of people. Rather the interest of the people are represented in the different parties elected. This system places the divisions and fractures within society into parliament. Voters may elect candidates of parties with specific religious or ethnic bents that are antithetical to liberal democracy.

Even if the number of “extremists” elected is of a small number, it can prove deadly when forming a coalition. I believe that last year when the Spanish socialists won the elections after the Madrid train bombing, they had to form a coalition with the Spanish communists to gain a majority in parliament. So regardless of whether or not the party with the most votes is extremist, it may have to appease Islamofascists within the coalition.

One of the most volatile aspects of Iraq’s PR system is that it has an extremely low threshold for a party to gain a seat. To be specific, a party only needs 0.36% of the vote to gain a seat in the Iraqi parliament. Most countries have a minimum threshold to combat wackjob candidates from being elected. For instance, Hitler was elected Chancellor under a PR system. Germany instated a 5% threshold for any party to gain admittance to parliament after WWII to exclude fringe parties. In Turkey, the beloved example of “Islamic” “democracy,” there is a 10% minimum threshold to keep the extremists, who believe that the only good infidel is a headless one, out of parliament.

If we had PR in the U.S., Michael Moore could probably form a party to gain 100 seats in Congress. How bad could this be for Iraq?