The reform of the electoral law arrives in the Senate with a series of issues still open in the majority and of no small importance which, even in detail, hide a stringent, different, political logic between the allies. With the possibility of including a run-off having almost completely disappeared (it is defined by some sources as "on a dead end" and the amendment should be withdrawn), the centre-right technicians - who will meet in the late morning - will be called upon to find a synthesis, on which it cannot be ruled out that the last word lies with the leaders. In fact, on the threshold of the prize, we are still dealing with the 'anti-bushes' rule, the one on mayoral candidates and other smaller filings. And the agreement must be signed before the start of voting at Palazzo Madama, probably not before Thursday. In fact, the battle that the broad field announces "of tough opposition" also weighs on the times. Preliminary rulings and mass registration for senators to speak: without the time constraints the debate promises to be long even if the final vote has already been scheduled for September 15th.
Returning to the open questions in the centre-right, the lowering of the threshold above which the prize is won from 42 to 41% seems destined to have some chance. A measure contained in an FdI amendment and on which the prime minister's party could insist despite the doubts especially from FI parties. The logic of lowering the threshold, even by just one point, it is explained, is not to 'distort' the ratio of the law, allowing whoever wins more easily to earn the prize, avoiding having the distribution of seats based on pure proportional representation. Whoever wins, in fact, including the center-left. A logic of coherence of the prime minister's party which clashes, however, with the realpolitik of those among the Azzurri who summarize it thus: "in my ranking there is victory, draw, defeat...".
In the first version of Bignami the threshold was 40% but was then raised to 42% also due to some findings by constitutionalists linked to the fact that with the fixed premium on a threshold that is too low it does not give certainty of the majority. Therefore, in addition to the political conflict, it is also an issue linked to possible constitutional issues. Just like the so-called 'anti-bushes' rule, this too is the subject of a tug of war (between the exclusion of only those who are under 2% or 1%) but which the centre-right is nevertheless determined to modify. Another topic of discussion is the rule that provides for the reduction of the time within which a mayor who wants to run for political office must resign due to incompatibility. On this point, on the Forza Italia side there is no shortage of those who point out that, in particular with the preferences mechanism, mayors who decide to run for the Chamber or Senate have an advantage over those who are already in Parliament, where they arrived without preferences. In short, the comparison, at least on paper, promises to be challenging. Especially since the text will arrive in the Chamber without a mandate for the rapporteur and it will therefore be necessary to repeat all the votes carried out in the commission on the text including that for the introduction of preferences with the blocked list leader mechanism. The votes, however, will all take place by open ballot, unlike what happened in the Chamber where the centre-right was betrayed by the secret vote before the summer.
