The paper "A Comparison of the Electoral Systems in Australia and New Zealand" is a great example of a case study on politics. Political systems are one of the crucial factors that greatly affect the development of a given country because they determine aspects such as policies, development partnerships, peace, and cultural enhancement as well as socio-economic development strategies. In democratic nations such as Australia and New Zealand, such systems are put in place by the citizens who are deemed mature to make independent decisions on the people who can govern them and drive change through the implementation of policies and manifestos positively (Vowles 1995, p.
95-115). For such reasons, the two countries have put in place systems through which the appointment of leaders by the citizens takes place. However, differences exist in the manner these systems function in the two countries as it will be established in this paper. This paper highlights the differences that occur in the electoral systems of Australia and New Zealand. It is established that the electoral system of New Zealand is better than that of Australia and should be embraced by various republics across the globe that encounter challenges in their electoral bodies (Nagel 2000, p.
113-27; Farrell 2006, p. 4). Discussion One of the basic functions of elections is to transform the number of votes of people directly through a transparent way into the type of individuals to govern the various institutions in the government of a given country. The two electoral bodies in the countries have been under various analyses, with various scholars concerned with their effectiveness and efficiency in their respective countries. For instance, there have been various calls for reforms in the Australian electoral body to enable it to meet the standards of other Commonwealth members; an aspect that has risen from the various challenges that the current system is facing concerning its functionality (Farrell 2006, p.
4). It should be noted that the electoral system of Australia serves to meet two main objectives, which include selecting the common leaders of the country and selecting the leaders of the upper house. The upper house is mandated to work differently from the government house (an equivalent of the common parliament); hence, the electoral body is entrusted with a great mandate of accomplishing the two vital objectives.
Therefore, one is more concerned with establishing whether the current electoral system in Australia is efficient enough to meet its mandate as it is currently constituted. Hill (2002, p. 437-455) argues that the compulsory voting system adopted by Australia is not good for the democracy of the country. This voting system was first introduced in Queensland in 1915 before spreading to the other parts of the world (McAllister 1986, p.
90). Even though the electoral system in Australia has worked well over the past years regarding its mandate, the increasing level of criticism it has been receiving from various stakeholders implies there is a need for changes for it to attain perfection. One of the areas where such criticism emanates is in the election of the country's senate system. Kumar and Walia (2011, p. 1825-1830) explain that Australia has one of the most powerful senates in the world, which is mandated to make very critical decisions of the country.