Stability in the Polity: Key Characteristics of a Strong Parliament

The German Constitution provides for a strictly parliamentary system: all democratic power flows through Parliament in long and unbroken chains of legitimation. At the federal level, no referenda or ballot measures exist; the system is one of pure representative democracy. Recent experimentation with Mini Publics (“Bürgerräte”) by the Bundestag—first set up in 2023—provides a careful opening. They bring together groups of citizens randomly drawn by lot who deliberate to develop concrete proposals that then are submitted to Parliament. Although they have a consultative role only (Decker Reference Decker2021), there are positive effects for those who participate in the process and, potentially, on a broader public as well.

In Parliament, MPs have a clear focus in dedicated policy areas. It follows from their committee assignment that mirrors ministerial portfolios. Inside committees, MPs specialize further and distribute responsibility in smaller segments, leading to a system of “rapporteur governance” (Siefken Reference Siefken, Siefken and Rommetvedt2022a, 125). Rapporteurs prepare and coordinate individual bills and exercise oversight over “their” agencies and departments. In this way, MPs can exercise substantial influence in the respective policy networks. However, MPs are not alone; through internal coordination, the Parliamentary Party Groups (PPGs) ensure that party discipline in Parliament is upheld and that the policy expertise of rapporteurs can be used.

Current Challenges and Concerns

The German polity has not been altered fundamentally in the past 75 years. The political system is set up as a coordination-and-compromise machine, bringing together parties from the majority and the opposition in a multilevel federal arena. Democracy, established after the catastrophic dictatorship of the Nazi Party, has broad public support—yet, governmental approval ratings have been at a historic low in 2024.

Indeed, there is public debate about whether German democracy is in danger in light of a strengthened right-wing populist party, the “Alternative für Deutschland” (AfD). In December 2024, it polled at 19% nationwide, having reached around 30% in some recent state elections. This discussion has the historical backdrop of the Weimar Republic, having failed in a context of political violence and economic depression when the Nazis used provisions of the democratic system to destroy it. The concern that this may happen again led millions of Germans to demonstrate against right-wing extremism in early 2024.

Satisfaction with Parliament has always been lower than with other state institutions, such as the Constitutional Court and the police. This can be explained by German political culture that largely follows the consociational model (Lijphart Reference Lijphart1984), which values compromise building and consensus rather than competition. Yet, parliamentary institutions clearly show conflict—and more so in recent years.

Turning up the Heat in German Politics

According to Sartori (Reference Sartori2005/1976, 69, 199), systems with a high temperature are characterized by ideological conflict, whereas those with a low temperature are more pragmatic and oriented toward cooperation. The “heat” in German politics has increased for various reasons.

The presence of the AfD since 2017 has changed the political discourse and interactions in Parliament. From the outset, this populist party has used Parliament as a stage to create outside attention among supporters. Its mode has not been on constructive cooperation; instead, it employs instruments of obstruction and provocation. Some AfD MPs even admitted protesters into Parliament who harassed other politicians. In Parliament, the AfD is focused on plenary activities, not committee work. Its provocations have led to many “calls to order” by the parliamentary presidium. Moreover, other parties have adjusted their behavior: more plenary presence, stronger reactions to speeches, and a “cordon sanitaire” making clear that there will be no cooperation with the AfD.This feeds anti-establishment rhetoric, and a populist party may profit from being ostracized. The “temperature” has gone up in Parliament.

The heat went up during the COVID-19 crisis. At the beginning of the pandemic in 2020, cooperation and cross-party support for government action were prevalent. But after the first wave of infections was over, a debate about the proper measures being taken (e.g., social distancing and masking) began. In the following months and years of this long-lasting crisis, conflicts became more pronounced and negativity increased in parliamentary debates and in the streets (Siefken Reference Siefken2023, 678).

The September 2021 general elections had two further effects on the heat in Parliament. For the first time, three parties from different parts of the political spectrum jointly formed the government: the Social Democratic Party (SPD), the Green Party, and the Liberal Party (FDP). Coalition negotiations were well organized and led to a detailed agreement (Siefken Reference Siefken2022b). However, this straightforward, “rationalized” government formation was not followed by governing in a similar manner. Instead, major conflicts erupted and played out openly, mostly among the two smaller coalition partners (i.e., the Greens and the FDP). Reactions to Russia’s war on Ukraine led to visible conflict, when individual MPs from within the majority publicly positioned themselves against their PPGs’ positions and the chancellor. The heat thus further intensified.

For the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), in the opposition for the first time in 16 years, it took time until it had “dusted itself off.” After narrowly losing the 2021 election, the party settled on new leadership and positioned itself in conflict mode—but nevertheless it occasionally cooperated with the majority. This was a significant difference from the ongoing collaboration of previous years, when the major parties (i.e., the CDU/Christian Social Union and the SPD) had governed jointly in grand coalitions for 12 years.

One piece of legislation had significant effects. In 2023, Parliament passed a reform of the electoral law, effectively limiting the size of Parliament to 630 members. Currently, the Bundestag has more than 730 members, making it the largest parliament in the world. Despite attempts in recent years, it had not been possible to pass this reform in the mode of “cold politics”—that is, through compromise and consensus between the majority and the opposition. Politics surrounding this change in the German polity was intense; members of the opposition decried foul play: “a manipulation of electoral law” and “an attack on democracy itself” (Siefken Reference Siefken2024). When the Constitutional Court decided in July 2024 that most of the rules indeed were constitutional (some adjustments were required), attention to this issue subsided. Beyond circles of those politically interested, there had not been much previous awareness in German society either. However, this certainly had an effect on the atmosphere inside Parliament as a toxic issue.

Stability in Institutions, Instability in Political Behavior

Overall, the German political system has strong institutional stability. Parliament is working and accomplishing things in its usual routines: 250 laws were passed at the halfway point of the electoral period, which is the typical number. Parliamentary questions are asked and answered at high rates, and plenary debates are held at the usual intervals. An intermediate external evaluation revealed that the coalition contract was well on its way to being largely fulfilled, as in past years (Vehrkamp and Matthieß Reference Vehrkamp and Matthieß2023).

In the meantime, visible conflicts have arisen for three reasons: parliamentary presence and actions of the right-wing AfD, the new strategic approach of the opposition, and internal conflicts in the coalition. The breakdown of the coalition in November 2024 led to early general elections in February 2025, intensifying conflict in a contested electoral campaign. In a political culture that values compromise and is based on competition toward the center, these conflicts work against trust in political actors. They can have reverberations on the political system.

To summarize, the parliamentary situation and the political perceptions in Germany currently are driven by various changes in German politics. We observe “hot politics” in a system that values “cold politics.” This is good news because politics—that is, the style of getting things done—can be changed most easily by the political actors. The question is: Do they have the incentives, intentions, and capacities to do so?