germany 1793 Essay Example

represents the states. The number of votes allocated to each state in the Bundesrat depends on its population and ranges from three to five votes per state.

The Bundesrat is made up of members who are chosen by state governments while they are in office. The composition of this upper house can change as state elections occur during the federal parliamentary term. The approval of the Bundesrat is important for certain laws, especially those that impact the states and the budget. If there are any differences, they are usually resolved through a cooperative committee consisting of representatives from both houses. On the other hand, the Bundestag, which serves as the lower house, must have a minimum of 656 representatives.

The Bundestag, also referred to as the president, is elected from the largest parliamentary group and holds various responsibilities. These include functioning as a legislative body, selecting the federal chancellor, and supervising government activities. Changing the Basic Law necessitates a two-thirds majority in both parliament houses. Consequently, opposition parties can block alterations to the constitution by having representation in either the Bundestag or Bundesrat. The electoral system was finalized in 1956 with the objective of ensuring a government that reflects public desires and proportional representation. Candidates are elected through a majority vote across approximately 328 equally-sized constituencies.

Each state has a quota of MPs for each party, based on the party vote. The remaining MPs needed are selected from party lists. If a party wins more seats in the directly elected segment than its party list results, the lower house is expanded. In 1990, this resulted in an extra six seats. To avoid fragmentation, a party must either secure

three direct mandates or garner 5% of the total vote to have parliamentary representation.

The lack of parliamentary representation due to the 5% criteria poses a hindrance to the growth of new parties. Additionally, instead of conducting by-elections, parliament vacancies are filled using the party list from the previous election, making it challenging for small or emerging parties to establish themselves. In 1990, East German parties were able to overcome this limitation by creating temporary umbrella groups. However, state elections occur annually and offer parties an opportunity to focus on securing seats in state parliaments.

The Bundestag, also known as Germany's lower house, has a fixed duration of four years and can only call for early elections under specific circumstances. The head of government, known as the chancellor, is selected by the Bundestag upon the recommendation of the federal president. In practice, each major political party nominates their candidate for chancellor before the election, making the president's role mostly symbolic. Once chosen, the chancellor appoints cabinet members who require approval from the president; however, they are accountable to parliament. Individual ministers do not possess authority to initiate a motion of no confidence. The government can only be removed if the opposition gains majority support through a constructive vote of no confidence.

In late 1982, the opposition managed to create a majority in support of a new government by winning over the Free Democrat Party from the ruling Social Democrats to the Christian Democrats. This allowed the Christian Democrats to form a coalition.

Under specific circumstances, a government can resign in order to call for early elections. After forming the new government with the Christian Democrats and Free Democrats in

1982, they decided that early elections were necessary. However, because it was their only strategy and within legal bounds, they had to present this decision before the constitutional court.

The federal president has certain formal duties as a head of state, such as signing treaties and overseeing procedures for appointing the chancellor. Nonetheless, their role is primarily symbolic.

All presidential orders in Germany, as per the constitution of 1919, must be counter-signed by either the chancellor or the relevant minister. This requirement aims to rectify the power imbalance between the president and parliament during that period. The president is elected for a five-year term through a ceremonial procedure involving both the full Bundestag and an equal number of delegates from state parliaments.

Richard von Weizsacker, the former Christian Democrat mayor of West Berlin, served as president from 1984 to 1994. Despite being a former politician, the president is expected to remain apolitical. In 1989, the German Bundestag passed the Stage one Postal Reform legislation, which became effective on January 1, 1990.

The reforms implemented a separation between jurisdictional/regulatory and entrepreneurial functions, and also led to the emergence of telecommunications, postal services, and postal banking as related business sectors. The objective of these reforms was to foster increased competition, with the expectation that it would drive innovation and progress in the telecommunications industry. The reforms were hailed in Europe as a significant liberalization of the German telecommunications market.

Under the new structure, the Deutsche Bundespost (DBT) granted a network monopoly to its Telekom branch. However, other sectors of the telecommunications market, such as mobile and satellite communications, which legally fell under this monopoly, were freed up. Over time, licenses

were issued to private companies in these specific areas of the monopoly. Telekom is obligated by law to provide both the necessary infrastructure and associated services. The implementation of the new telecommunications structure coincided with the process of German unification, which created delays in achieving the goals of postal reform.

Many Ministers used Telekom's successful expansion as a way to gain recognition, while postponing the separation of political and entrepreneurial roles. In the early 1990s, Telekom was in the process of transitioning from a public administration to an organization with entrepreneurial characteristics. During and after the reunification, Telekom primarily followed the objectives and procedures of the previous Germany. As a result, there was no substantial discussion between Telekom and the Federal Minister of Posts and Telecommunications (BMPT) regarding the guidelines for Telekom's investments in the new eastern states.

Telekomfrom has to decide whether it should adhere to its original political standpoint or its new entrepreneurial approach, and whether there is even a difference between the two. Such a judgment is not only desirable but necessary in order to determine Telekom's responsibilities. The regulatory political and organizational structure that was established in the Western German telecommunications sector was also applied in the new federal states of the East on October 3, 1990. This decision was made despite the significant differences in the former GDR, where telecommunications development was very poor. The primary focus in the East was the rapid establishment of a basic infrastructure, while in the West, the emphasis was on promoting network and service innovations. However, after reunification, the BMPT made little effort to modify the regulatory political framework in this sector with regards to the

circumstances in Eastern Germany.

The monopoly on terminal equipment in Western Germany ended in the middle of 1990, but was still in place in Eastern Germany until the end of 1991. In mid-1990, restrictions on private agencies providing satelite communication services were relaxed. Initially, there were certain requirements for obtaining special permits, but these were removed in March 1991. However, these exceptions to the voice telephone service monopoly only last until 1997 and have not significantly contributed to the growth of telecommunication services.

Only a few private satellite service firms have provided suitable services as a result. The major hindrance to a broader range of services offered by private investors is the consideration of cost and quality control, in light of the rapid advancements in East-West communication possibilities. In June 1991, the BMPT also expanded Mannesmann Mobilfunk's license, the second cellular mobile radio operator selected for Western Germany in December 1989, to cover the entire country. Simultaneously, it mandated that Mannesmann must grant 90% of the population and 75% of the area in the new states in the East access to the D2 network by the end of 1994. The development of the two mobile telephone networks, D2 and D1, in the 900 MHz band, shortly after the political shift, was well-suited for significantly expanding services available in Eastern Germany.

The federal government encountered problems in financing German unification. To address this, Telekom was required to make a special contribution of approximately DM 3 billion to the federal treasury. This contribution, although less burdensome than originally planned, still places an additional financial strain on Telekom and results in higher costs for telecommunication services in Germany. The fall of

the Berlin Wall and the end of the Communist regime in 1989-90 raised uncertainty about whether the two Germanies would be rapidly unified. In the months leading up to the official unification in summer 1990, numerous decisions were made in both East and West Germany that significantly impacted the German telecommunication sector.

Beginning in 1990, joint committees were established between the BMPT and the GDR ministry responsible, as well as between DBT Telekom and Deutsche Post Telekom. These committees aimed to facilitate the speedy development of telecommunications infrastructure in the GDR and oversee the merger of the entities' regulatory bodies. By March of that year, the Telekom 2000 program had been successfully executed by the two businesses, enabling Deutsche Post Telekom to commence infrastructure expansion in the GDR with support from DBT Telekom. At this time, the forces advocating for German unification had already gained influence within the post and telecommunication sector of the GDR.

In order to prepare for the restructuring of the GDR telecommunication sector, systematic reorganization of structures was done. There was anticipation of restructuring similar to that in Western Germany, which led to the separation of the GDR Post Ministry from Deutsche Post and the division of the business undertaking into three divisions. These actions also prevented the development of different regulatory political structures during this busy period. It is a known fact that foreign network operators made offers to the GDR Minister of Posts during this time and there was consideration given to licensing a third digital cellular mobile radio network operator in the GDR for a brief period. However, the priority was to ensure optimum conditions for the smooth union of

telecommunications branches in East and West.

Their strategy was to achieve this by creating regulatory political and organizational structures which were as uniform as possible. They adopted the sectoral structures of the Western German telecommunication sector in the new states of the East without significant modifications. The telecommunication sector's developments following the political turning point were similar to developments in other branches of society, such as the sciences and health service. There is a debate regarding whether the structures introduced by the postal reform were suitable for the rapid developments in telecommunications in Eastern Germany, or if it would have been better to choose a regulatory political structure that better matched the situation. However, except for a few exceptions, no such discussions were ever undertaken.

Due to the swift German unification and the strong public demand for immediate improvements in the industry, it was common to spend hours attempting to dial numbers in East-West communication, without success. Available frequencies would have been in the 1800 MHz band, but this idea was not pursued further. This may have been due to the lack of standardization of DCS 1800 and consideration for the financial stability of DBT Telekom. DBT Telekom had just initiated a DM 60 billion expansion program for the new federal states in the East. Nonetheless, the new federal states still played a role in the future development of a private E1 network operator based on DCS1800. In the spring of 1993, E-Plus committed to begin building its network in the East.

In the autumn and winter of 1990, the Monopolkommission issued a statement advocating for a competitive market or strengthening competitive elements in developing infrastructure in the

East. However, these ideas were not pursued due to the belief that major changes in regulatory policy would not result in significant developments. Private investment in Eastern Germany was hesitant and companies were skeptical of the industry structure. Telekom's merger with Deutsche Post and ownership of existing buildings and land minimized its challenges with ownership and administrative procedures. The main objective was to improve the telecommunications infrastructure quickly.

Telecommunications played a critical role in the economic recovery and the integration of East and West. There was no time for further experimentation in politics or technology. Another political objective of unification was to establish a uniform standard of living across the East and West. This objective had significant implications for the political process and greatly influenced economic developments in Eastern Germany's telecommunications sector. Despite overwhelming demand for telephone connections and services, there were economic reasons to raise tariffs above Western levels. However, implementing such a policy was politically unfeasible.

Regardless of the different conditions in Eastern and Western Germany, telephone tariffs in the East were aligned with those in the West as soon as technically feasible. In the new states of the East, goals of economic efficiency have been sacrificed for the sake of a fair distribution of the limited number of telephone connections, similar to many other sectors. The federal counties manage the telecommunications system in West Germany as a public service.

The legal basis for the state monopoly of the West German PTT is Article 87 of the West German basic law. This article states that the PTT must be administered directly by the federal government and its lower administrative offices. The authority to legislate on postal

and telecommunication matters rests solely with the federal government, as stated in Article 73 of the basic law. The head of the West German PTT is the federal minister for postal and telecommunication services. According to Article 65 of the West German basic law, this minister is responsible for autonomously managing the affairs of the West German PTT.

The federal minister for postal and telecommunication services holds the responsibility of both telecommunication policy formation and administration management, although his power is controlled by the Postal Administration Council (Para 1, Art 1 of the postal administration law). The members of this council consist of the West German Bundestag, the West German Bundesrat, representatives from different areas of the economy, seven members of the Deutsche Postgewerkschaft (DPG) trade union, and experts from broadcasting and finance. All 24 council members are appointed by their respective national councils or by the ministers for postal and telecommunication services and finance.

The Postal Administration Council, as stated in Para 12 of the postal administration law, is responsible for deciding on the budget of the West German PTT and has executive rights concerning the use of postal and telecommunication systems. These executive rights encompass pricing, decisions on areas of activity, and changes in the telecommunication infrastructure (Para 12, Art 6). The council is an important control body and must approve all regulations proposed by the federal minister for postal and telecommunication services. However, the minister has the authority to cancel decisions made by the council. Despite this veto power, the federal government and Bundestag do not have direct control over West German telecommunication policies. Nonetheless, the West German PTT must comply with the principles

of West German politics as stated in Para 2, Art 1 of the postal administration law.

However, the federal government's principles are so vague that they cannot effectively guide telecommunication policies. Additionally, the influence of the Bundestag is weakened because the West German PTT has control over its own budget through a special fund. Parliament's involvement is limited to the participation of members in the postal administration council and political positions in the federal postal and telecommunication administration. As a result, West German telecommunication policy revolves around the postal administration council and the postal administration. Despite occasional allegations of opportunism, it is plausible that the postal administration has adapted to potential compromises within the council. This is evident from the frequent clashes in the council, and challenging its decisions too often would likely trigger detrimental campaigns against it.

The telecommunication infrastructure's development within the political and institutional framework faced increasing criticism in the 1970s. This led to a demand for reform within the same framework. The criticism stemmed from the rapid technological advancements of the 1960s and 1970s, particularly in microelectronics, transmission technology, and digitalization. These advancements allowed for the merging of telecommunication and data-processing, ultimately creating new quantitative and qualitative requirements for the telecommunication infrastructure.

According to critics, the lack of competition in the West German PTT prevented them from fulfilling these requirements. The Liberal Democratic Party, in particular, expressed concerns about West Germany's international competitiveness. Other countries that have already deregulated their telecommunication systems, such as the UK, USA, and Japan, also called for market opening. Germany is home to eight main political parties: Christian Democratic Union (CDU), Christian Social Union (CSU), Free Democrat Party (FDP),

Social Democrat Party (SDP), The Greens, The Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), The Republicans, and the Deutsche Volksunion.

Christian Democratic Union

The CDU, which brings together Catholics and Protestants, has been the most influential political party in post-war Germany. Its foreign policy, shaped by Konrad Adenauer, is centered on the Atlantic alliance. While it also embraced the opening towards the east introduced by Willy Brandt in the late 1960s and early 1970s, it currently focuses on stability in post-communist Eastern Europe. Leading the CDU since 1982, Helmut Kohl maintains a strong personal control over the party. In terms of domestic policy, the CDU embraces the social market concept pioneered by Ludwig Erhard in the 1950s.

Christian Social Union

The CSU is a sister party of the CDU.

The Christian Social Union (CSU) is a Catholic party that operates exclusively in Bavaria without any challenges from the CDU. Under the leadership of the late Franz Josef Strauss, the CSU was more openly assertive in pursuing German interests compared to the CDU. Currently, the CSU is led by the finance minister, Theo Waigel. However, Edmund Stoiber, the prime minister of Bavaria, is also a significant figure in the CSU and carries on the aggressive political tradition of Franz Josef Strauss.

Free Democrat Party

The Free Democrat Party identifies as a liberal party in the European sense and advocates for limited government interference in various aspects of life, including matters like divorce, abortion, and the economy. In terms of economic policies, they generally lean towards the right of the CDU.

However, the FDP's most dominant personality in the second half of the 1970s, and until his

resignation in 1992, was Hans-Dietrich Genscher, who made his name as foreign minister. The present leader, Klaus Kinkel, is also foreign minister.

Social Democrat Party

Once Marxist (though always democratic), the Social Democrats established a programme of pragmatic reform known as the Bad Godesberg program at the end of the 1950s. This paved the way for Helmut Schmidt, two of Germany's most influential post-war politicians.

The economic philosophy between the SPD and the Christian Democrats' social market is largely similar. However, the SPD criticizes the CDU for not addressing the financial burdens of reunification and advocates for higher taxes, particularly on the wealthier individuals. In terms of foreign policy, the SPD has always stressed establishing connections with Eastern countries without disregarding the importance of the Atlantic alliance or the EU. There is a significant pacifist faction within the party that opposes any German military involvement outside of Germany, including participation in UN peacekeeping missions. It is worth noting that pacifists can be found in all major parties.

The Greens

During the 1980s, the Greens had a significant impact on German policies across various major parties after surpassing the 5% electoral threshold in the 1983 elections.

In December 1990, the Party of Democratic Socialism (formerly known as the SED or ruling party of East Germany) did not meet the threshold in western Germany due to an internal division between realists and purists. However, they were represented in the Bundestag because they won more than 5% in alliance with Bundnis 90, a group of protest parties from the former East Germany, where a separate threshold was provided. Additionally, they participate in governing coalitions in some state parliaments.

Under the leadership of Gregor Gysi, a

moderate leader who was never closely affiliated with the Honecker regime, the party has garnered support from individuals who have experienced job or housing loss due to reunification. The Republicans and Deutsche Volksunion, both representing nationalist factions within German politics, have capitalized on the immigration matter.