Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies is debating electoral reform, with parties and lawmakers split over which voting system to adopt. House Speaker Hugo Motta, of the Republicanos party, has reached an agreement with Centrão leaders to pursue a mixed-district system starting in 2034, but the proposal faces resistance even among parties involved in the talks. No consensus has emerged on the model or on a proposed transition system for the 2030 election.
The debate comes amid the PL’s growing presence in the Chamber. Under the current open-list proportional system, votes for candidates from the same party or federation are combined to determine how many seats it receives. Those seats then go to the party’s highest-polling candidates, provided each reaches at least 10% of the state’s electoral quotient. As a result, highly popular candidates can help elect colleagues with fewer votes. Nikolas Ferreira (PL-MG) and Lucas Pavanato (PL-SP), for example, each received more than three million votes and contributed to the election of other party members.
Centrão parties criticize the current system, arguing that it benefits candidates with strong social media profiles and allows a small number of highly popular politicians to bring less-voted colleagues into Congress. Motta’s proposal would delay the mixed-district system’s introduction until 2034, an approach intended to ease lawmakers’ concerns about their own political futures.
Under a closed-list proportional system, voters choose a party rather than an individual candidate. Seats are allocated according to each party’s vote total and filled in an order set by party leadership. Supporters say this would strengthen parties and collective campaigning; critics argue it would concentrate too much power in party leadership.
A district system would have voters elect a representative for their region through a majoritarian vote. Its supporters say it could link elections more closely to local concerns and make representatives easier to hold accountable. However, candidates focused on specific issues, professional groups or ideological constituencies—and those whose supporters are spread across a state—could find it harder to win seats.
In the mixed-district system under discussion, half the seats would go to the top vote-getters in defined territories. The other half would be allocated to the most-voted parties and filled from lists selected by those parties. Opposition leader Cabo Gilberto (PL-PB) said lawmakers from the PL and Novo had decided to oppose the change. Some Centrão members also resist, particularly representatives of smaller parties and the lower house’s less prominent ranks, who fear losing ground to locally popular figures such as mayors. Views within the PT are also divided: some members are open to discussing a mixed model, while others oppose it, citing the risk of losing seats and the influence of factions in some territories.
Other models are part of the debate. Under the “big district” system, the most-voted candidates in each state would win seats without relying on votes for their party to meet the electoral quotient. Critics say this could weaken parties, encourage personality-driven campaigns, limit parliamentary renewal and favor expensive campaigns at the expense of diverse representation.
A mixed version of the big-district model would allocate half the seats to the state’s top vote-getters and the remainder to parties according to their vote totals, with those seats filled from party-selected lists. Podemos and Solidariedade, which took part in discussions on electoral reform, have said they support this approach.
Sources: Folha Poder.