AUSTRIA'S POLITICAL SYSTEM has been a model of stability since
democracy was restored in 1945. In contrast to the interwar period, when
domestic political rivalries and foreign intervention brought the system
of government set out by the constitution of 1920 to a standstill, after
World War II this reestablished parliamentary democracy functioned
smoothly in what came to be termed the Second Republic.
For most of the postwar period, Austrian politics appeared unique in
many respects to outside observers. Between 1945 and 1966, the country
was ruled by the so-called grand coalition of the two major parties, the
Austrian People's Party (Österreichische Volkspartei--ÖVP) and the
Socialist Party of Austria (Sozialistische Partei Österreichs--SPÖ).
(In 1991 the name of the latter party was changed to the Social
Democratic Party of Austria [Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs--SPÖ].)
This arrangement appealed to Austria's politicians and people mainly
because it symbolized the reconciliation between social groups that had
fought a brief civil war before the absorption (Anschluss) of Austria by
Nazi Germany in 1938. The coregency of the ÖVP and SPÖ led to the
systematic dividing of political offices and civil service posts, known
in Austria as Proporz. Also benefiting from this arrangement
were key economic and professional organizations that were aligned with
the two major parties.
At times, Austria's political system seemed impervious to change, but
by the middle of the 1980s, it had become clear that far-reaching social
and economic trends were beginning to affect the country's politics. The
dominance of the ÖVP and SPÖ was challenged by the reemergence of the
Freedom Party of Austria (Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs--FPÖ), led
by Jörg Haider, a young right-wing populist who appealed to German
nationalist sentiment. After the FPÖ's short-lived coalition with the
SPÖ between 1983 and 1986, it continued to attract increasing numbers
of voters. In the national election of 1990, the FPÖ won 16.6 percent
of the vote, establishing itself as a new power in the Nationalrat. In
early 1993, however, some members of the FPÖ withdrew from it and
formed their own party, The Liberal Forum (Das Liberale Forum), a
potential threat to Haider's political future. Concern over
environmental issues has also affected the Austrian political process,
as evidenced by the entry of Green political parties into parliament in
1986. Previous patterns of government, which revolved almost exclusively
around reaching agreement between the ÖVP and the SPÖ, were replaced
by a more contentious, freewheeling atmosphere where more voices are
heard.
While the political process underwent gradual but distinct changes, a
variety of scandals during the 1980s brought Austria to the world's
attention. The best-known involved Kurt Waldheim, elected president in
1986. Shortly after his election, a sharp international controversy
erupted over whether he had been involved in Nazi atrocities in
Yugoslavia during World War II. Although a thorough investigation found
no evidence that Waldheim had participated in any atrocities, his method
of handling the affair disappointed many Austrians and foreign
observers. The strong emotions unleashed inside Austria by this matter
showed that the older generation is still reluctant to discuss the
country's role in the Nazi era.
Major changes in Austria's political landscape opened prospects of a
new basis for its foreign policy. The bedrock of Austrian diplomacy in
the postwar period has been its commitment to permanent neutrality. In
order to achieve the removal of Soviet occupying forces, the Austrian
government in 1955 pledged never to join a military alliance or to
permit the stationing of foreign troops on its soil. Thereafter, Austria
pursued a policy of active neutrality, which included participation in
numerous United Nations peacekeeping operations. During the Cold War
period, Austria was a consistent advocate of détente between the United
States and the Soviet Union.
By the late 1980s, a growing number of politicians had concluded that
the country should examine closely the question of whether or not to
join the European Community. After a prolonged debate over the merits of
membership, the Austrian government submitted a formal entry application
in the summer of 1989. As of late 1993, a substantial number of Austrian
citizens still had serious reservations about joining the organization,
which as of November 1993 came to be known as the European Union.
Membership would have to be approved in a popular referendum. Whatever
the outcome of the vote, the disintegration of communism in Eastern
Europe and the dissolution of the Soviet Union have raised the question
of whether neutrality should--or could--remain the guiding principle of
Austrian foreign policy.
<>CONSTITUTIONAL
FRAMEWORK
Austria is a parliamentary democracy of the kind that exists in most
of Western Europe. The legal basis for the Austrian system of government
is the constitution of 1920, which was amended in 1929 and several times
thereafter. The constitution of 1920 provided a transition from
Austria-Hungary (also seen as the Austro-Hungarian Empire) to a
democratic federal republic in which the law emanates from the people.
The constitution was suspended from 1934 to 1938 during the
authoritarian administrations of Engelbert Dollfuss and Kurt von
Schuschnigg and again during the Anschluss that was forced on Austria by
Adolf Hitler from 1938 to 1945. Since 1945, when the Second Republic was
proclaimed, Austria has been governed by the 1920 constitution as
amended.
Executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government were
established by the 1920 constitution, with the executive branch
subordinate to the legislative branch. The federal presidency as
established by the 1920 constitution was a weak political office whose
incumbent was elected by a joint session of the bicameral legislature,
the Bundesversammlung (Federal Assembly). The constitutional amendments
of 1929 increased the president's political role by granting him the
formal power to appoint or dismiss the chancellor and, on the
chancellor's recommendation, the cabinet. The 1929 amendments also
provided that the right of electing the president be taken away from the
legislature and given to the people.
Austria's political system is federal in nature, reflecting the fact
that the country consists of nine provinces. Although Article 15 of the
constitution states that the provinces shall have jurisdiction over all
matters not explicitly reserved for the federal government, Austrian
federalism is weak and underdeveloped. The areas of law reserved for the
provinces are few in number and relatively unimportant. Among the areas
where the federal government is almost exclusively responsible are
foreign affairs, national security, justice, finance, civil and criminal
law, police matters, and education. In other areas of law, the provinces
are called on to pass implementing legislation for matters already
decided at the federal level. This process, known as indirect federal
administration, applies to areas such as elections, highway police, and
housing affairs. Other laws are made and administered at the provincial
level, but within federally established guidelines. These concern social
welfare, land reform, and provincial administration. Areas where the
provinces have primary authority include municipal affairs (for example,
trash removal and major aspects of zoning), preschool and kindergarten,
construction laws, fire control, and <>tourism
. The constitution does not
include a bill of rights as such, but it does guarantee equality before
the law and further guarantees that there shall be no discrimination
because of birth, gender, civil status, class, or religion. Individual
rights are further defined by inclusion in the constitution of the final
article, which raises certain older Austrian laws to the rank of
constitutional law. Among them is the Basic Law of December 1867, which
establishes equality before the law, inviolability of property, and
freedom of assembly, expression, and worship. Laws promulgated in 1862
set forth individual rights regarding personal liberty and one's home.
These rights include not being held without a warrant and, except in
unusual circumstances, not allowing homes to be searched without a
warrant.
Some restrictions are placed on freedom of expression and
association. Proper authorities must be informed when a new association
is formed. Officials then have six weeks to object to its formation if
the group is thought to be illegal or a potential threat to the
republic. Since the Second Republic was established in 1945, care has
been taken to ensure that laws concerning individuals are in accord with
the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948.
Amendments to the constitution can be made through laws designated
constitutional laws or through constitutional provisions if the
amendment is part of another law. Passage of an amendment requires a
two-thirds majority vote in the presence of at least one-half the
members of the Nationalrat (National Council), parliament's lower house.
Constitutional laws or provisions are accompanied by a national
referendum only if requested by one-third of the deputies of either the
Nationalrat or the Bundesrat (Federal Council), parliament's upper
house. In 1984 a constitutional amendment provided that amendments
changing the division of responsibilities between the federal government
and the provinces require the approval of two-thirds of the Bundesrat as
well as two-thirds of the Nationalrat.
In addition to the amended constitution, two laws--a treaty and a
constitutional law--are particularly important to the constitutional
development of Austria because they concern the country's international
status and reaffirm the people's basic rights. In April 1955, a
stalemate over the restoration of full sovereignty to Austria was
finally broken when the Soviet Union agreed to drop its insistence that
a solution to the Austrian question be tied to the conclusion of a peace
treaty with Germany. This paved the way for the signing of the State
Treaty in May 1955 by the Four Powers (Britain, France, the Soviet
Union, and the United States) and Austria. The treaty established
Austria's frontiers as those existing on January 1, 1938, and forbade
economic or political union with Germany. Rights to a democratic
government and free elections were guaranteed, and the document
reiterated guarantees of fundamental rights and freedoms, including
equal rights for minorities. Specifically mentioned in this category
were Slovenes and Croats. The second law of constitutional importance is
the Federal Constitutional Law of October 26, 1955, on the Neutrality of
Austria. The law declared the country's permanent neutrality and
prohibited it from entering into military alliances or allowing foreign
countries to establish military bases within the borders of Austria.
A 1929 amendment to the 1920 constitution introduced the concept of a
popularly elected president. Because of the suspension of the
constitution in 1934, however, the first popular election of a president
did not take place until 1951. The president serves a six-year term and
is limited to two consecutive terms. Candidates must be at least
thirty-five years of age and eligible to vote in Nationalrat elections.
Political parties nominate presidential candidates, but it is
customary, given the limited powers of the position, for the president
to serve in a nonpartisan manner. To win an election, a candidate must
receive more than 50 percent of the votes. If no candidate succeeds on
the first ballot, a runoff election is held between the two candidates
receiving the highest number of votes. The president serves as head of
state. Presidential duties include convoking, adjourning, and, in rare
cases, dissolving the Nationalrat. The president signs treaties,
verifies that legal procedures for legislation have been carried out,
and grants reprieves and pardons. Although he cannot veto legislation,
the president is empowered to reject a cabinet proposal or delay
enactment of a bill. Unless the constitution states otherwise, official
acts of the president require the countersignature of the chancellor or
the relevant minister.
The president plays an important, though largely formal, role in the
political process of forming and dissolving governments. In the
aftermath of a parliamentary election, the president invites the leader
of the strongest party in the Nationalrat to form a government. This
duty reflects the fact that both the government and parliament are
responsible to the president in the sense that he can dismiss individual
members of the government, including the chancellor, as well as dissolve
the Nationalrat. The president, on the recommendation of the chancellor,
also appoints individuals to cabinet positions and other important
government positions, including that of vice chancellor. The president
also can dismiss individual cabinet officials, but only on the
recommendation of the chancellor. During the Second Republic (that is,
since 1945), the president has dissolved the Nationalrat only twice, in
1971 and 1986, in both cases because the incumbent chancellor and his
party wished to have a new election.
The president has emergency authority that gives him significant
powers. Should an emergency arise when the Nationalrat is not in
session, the cabinet can request that the president act on the basis of
"provisional law-amending ordinances," as provided for in the
constitution. Such ordinances require the countersignature of the
cabinet. Emergency decrees must be sent to the Nationalrat. If it is not
in session, the president must convoke a special session. The
Nationalrat has four weeks either to enact a law to replace the decree
or to void the decree.
Two procedures are outlined in the constitution for pressing charges
against the president: one entails a referendum; the other entails a
vote by a joint session of parliament, the Bundesversammlung (Federal
Assembly). To set a referendum in motion, one-half of the Nationalrat
deputies must be present and vote by a two-thirds majority to ask the
chancellor to convoke the Bundesversammlung, which then must vote by a
simple majority for a referendum. The referendum is carried if a simple
majority of voters vote in favor of it. If the referendum is defeated,
then the president is regarded as reelected, the Nationalrat is
dissolved, and new elections are scheduled. Under no circumstances,
however, shall a president serve more than twelve years in office.
The second procedure for bringing charges against the president
results from his being responsible to the Bundesversammlung, which is
authorized to vote on his actions. Either house of parliament can ask
the chancellor to convoke the Bundesversammlung for such a purpose.
One-half of the members of each house must be present, and the
Bundesversammlung must cast a two-thirds vote to press charges against
the president.
If the president dies or if the office is vacated for any other
reason, a new election is held. In the interim, the chancellor carries
out necessary presidential duties.
Austria - Chancellor and Cabinet
The chancellor (prime minister) is the head of government as well as
chairman of the cabinet. Executive political power formally rests in the
hands of the cabinet. The chancellor, the cabinet, and their working
majority in the Nationalrat are the real focal point of executive power
in the political system. The chancellor is appointed by the president
and can also be dismissed by him. The chancellor is usually the leader
of the party that has won the most seats in the latest parliamentary
election. At the very least, he or she is the choice of a majority of
the new deputies. The chancellor must be eligible to serve in the
Nationalrat but need not be a member of it. The chancellor also serves
as head of the Federal Chancellery, which is staffed with civil
servants.
In most respects, the chancellor functions as first among equals in
the cabinet. He coordinates the work of the cabinet but is not entitled
to give orders to individual ministers. However, the chancellor's power
varies depending on political circumstances and his own political gifts.
In a coalition government, the chancellor shares coordinating duties
with the vice chancellor, who is the leader of the junior party in the
coalition. If the chancellor heads a one-party government, his or her
leeway to make decisions is increased. During the long period of rule
under Chancellor Bruno Kreisky (1970-83), the public visibility of the
chancellor was enhanced through the increased use of television. From
the standpoint of the public, the chancellor had become the dominant
figure of government.
On recommendation by the chancellor, the president appoints
individuals to the various cabinet positions. Cabinet members do not
have to be members of the Nationalrat, but they must be eligible to be
elected to it. Persons chosen as cabinet ministers are usually leading
members of a political party or interest group. Occasionally, however, a
person has entered the cabinet from a high-level civil service position.
The number of ministries varies; in 1993 there were fourteen
ministries. In a coalition government, the apportionment of the cabinet
posts is roughly proportional to the parties' respective strengths in
the Nationalrat. The awarding of particular posts is based on a
coalition agreement reached between the two parties.
In keeping with the traditional Austrian principle of Proporz
(the dividing of political offices according to the respective strengths
and interests of the parties), parties name individuals to posts of
particular concern to them. For example, if the SPÖ is a member of the
coalition, at a minimum it names the minister for labor and social
affairs, in keeping with the strong support it enjoys from the trade
unions. By the same token, if the ÖVP is part of the coalition, it
names the minister for agriculture and forestry because farmers are one
of its main interest groups. The chancellor and vice chancellor do not
have total control over the selection process for filling cabinet
positions. For example, the SPÖ faction in the Austrian Trade Union
Federation (Österreichischer Gewerkschaftsbund--ÖGB) usually chooses
the minister for labor and social affairs, and the ÖVP is careful to
allow its various auxiliary associations and provincial parties to make
certain selections. Beginning in 1987, the ÖVP and SPÖ have followed a
practice of selecting an independent to head the Ministry for Justice.
The cabinet is subject to dismissal by the president and the
Nationalrat. The president can dismiss the entire cabinet without the
concurrence of the chancellor, but removal of individual members
requires the recommendation of the chancellor. If the Nationalrat passes
a vote of no confidence--which requires that one-half of the deputies be
present--concerning the entire cabinet or a minister, the cabinet or
minister is removed from office.
State secretaries are appointed and leave office in the same manner
as ministers, but each government ministry does not have a state
secretary. State secretaries aid ministers in parliamentary business and
are bound by their ministers' instructions. They are nonvoting
participants in cabinet sessions. A state secretary is not necessarily a
member of the same party as the minister he serves.
Austria - Nationalrat
The Nationalrat (National Council), the lower house of parliament,
exercises all of the powers usually associated with a national
legislature. It has the power to remove the entire cabinet or individual
members of it by a vote of no confidence. All legislation and treaties
must be approved by the Nationalrat. Before a vote can take place, at
least one-third of the Nationalrat's members must be present. A simple
majority suffices for the passage of legislation. Sessions are public
unless the deputies determine otherwise.
Deputies elect a president and second and third presidents from among
their members to serve during the four-year legislative term. Party
leaders who are members of their party's executive and of a
parliamentary faction that serves as a liaison between parliament and a
political party are most likely to be presidential candidates. The
president and the third president belong to the same party, usually the
party holding the most seats in the Nationalrat. The second president
belongs to the other major party. Presidential duties include nominating
employees of the Federal Chancellery, whose staff serves the three
presidents. The three presidents preside over plenary sessions in
two-hour shifts. They also join with the chairmen of the parliamentary
factions to form the Presidial Conference, which directs the
Nationalrat's activities and decides the time and agenda of plenary
sessions and, to a lesser extent, the time and agenda of the committees.
The Presidial Conference is one of the rare groups not affected by the
custom of proportional representation. All parties holding seats in the
Nationalrat are represented on the conference.
In 1993 the Nationalrat contained roughly fifteen committees in which
legislative proposals are both prepared and examined and the results of
parliamentary investigations considered. Each committee has various
numbers of subcommittees assigned to deal with specific kinds of
legislation. In addition to the committees, there are also the Main
Committee and the Permanent Subcommittee, the members of which are
elected at the start of each new legislative period. The Main Committee
has responsibility for overseeing aspects of the state-run industries
and for dispatching Austrian troops on international peacekeeping
missions. It also participates in deciding the date for Nationalrat
elections and setting rates for postal and telephone services. The
president of the Nationalrat serves as chairman of the Main Committee.
The Permanent Subcommittee plays a limited role because its main
function is to fulfill the duties of the Main Committee in the case of
the dissolution of the Nationalrat by the president.
Equally as important as the committees are the Klubs
(factions), which all parties in the Nationalrat maintain. The factions
usually have a leader and an executive committee, and they provide
deputies with a behind-the-scenes setting to discuss political strategy
with like-minded colleagues. Individuals elected as deputies to the
Nationalrat automatically become members of their party's faction.
Faction leaders assign deputies to committees and decide on the
questions that are to be asked during debates and the priority for
legislative initiatives.
In addition to the work of the committees, another important function
of the Nationalrat is to question the government regularly on its
activities and legislative proposals. One device frequently employed is
an "interpellation," which summons for questioning before the
Nationalrat a particular cabinet minister or government official. A
minimum of twenty deputies is required to set an interpellation in
motion. Questioning a government official is the prelude to a
parliamentary debate on the issue.
A 1970 amendment to the election laws increased the number of
Nationalrat seats from 165 to 183. Seats in the Nationalrat are divided
among the country's nine provinces according to population. Deputies
serve a four-year term and are elected according to constitutional and
other federal laws. Candidates must be at least twenty years old on
January 1 of the election year and must also be eligible to vote.
The Nationalrat has only one session per year, beginning no earlier
than September 15 and ending no later than July 15. An extraordinary
session of the Nationalrat can be convoked either by order of the
federal president, by request of the cabinet, or by request of one-third
of the deputies. Once a request has been made, the extraordinary session
must commence within two weeks. After a parliamentary election, the
newly elected Nationalrat must be convened within thirty days.
The Nationalrat can be dissolved either by presidential action or by
itself. The president can dissolve the Nationalrat at the chancellor's
request, but he is limited to dismissing it only once for the same
reason. New elections must be held soon enough to enable the new
parliament to convene within 100 days of the dissolution. The
Nationalrat is empowered to dissolve itself by a simple majority vote.
During the Second Republic, membership of the Nationalrat has been
heavily weighted toward men who come from white-collar professions.
Changes in the sociological profile of the deputies have occurred
slowly. The Nationalrat elected in November 1990 contained a record 22
percent of female deputies. Prior to this election, female deputies had
never accounted for more than 15 percent of the total number of
deputies. The average age of the deputies elected in 1990 was forty-six.
Almost 40 percent of the deputies elected in 1990 were university
graduates, and 25 percent were employees of political parties,
politically oriented interest groups, or social welfare organizations.
The majority of legislative proposals originate in the executive.
Legislation occasionally starts in the Nationalrat, but the close
cooperation between the executive and the majority party in parliament
makes such initiation unnecessary most of the time. During the Second
Republic, governmental legislative proposals have outnumbered
Nationalrat initiatives by three to one. Parliament's role in the
legislative process is focused more on bringing to public attention the
background of the government's legislative proposals and exposing any
mistakes the government may have made. Opposition parties have the right
to force the government to answer any questions about pending
legislation.
Before a bill is introduced in parliament, it has already passed
through an intensive process of examination. The government solicits
comments from the various interest groups affected by the bill,
especially the chambers of agriculture, commerce, and labor. During this stage, a bill
frequently is modified to meet the objections of key interest groups and
opposition parties in parliament. Changes to legislative proposals may
also be made after a bill has been introduced in the Nationalrat, but
the majority of changes are made before the bill is introduced
officially. Bills are amended significantly by the parliament only 10 to
15 percent of the time.
By West European standards, the percentage of bills passed
unanimously by the Austrian parliament is high. Unanimity prevailed
anywhere between 38 and 49 percent of the time during the parliaments of
the 1970s and 1980s. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, with the advent
of the Greens in parliament and the increased power of the FPÖ,
unanimity was on the decline.
As the complexity of the issues facing government has increased, so
too has the importance of committees to the parliament's work. After a
bill reaches the Nationalrat, it is assigned to a committee and
frequently also to a subcommittee. Deputies typically spend twice as
much time in committee hearings as in plenary sessions. The
subcommittees hold even more hours of hearings than the full committees.
Because of the unwieldy nature of plenary sessions, 80 percent of
changes to government legislation occur in committee.
In 1975 the Nationalrat amended its procedures to give the opposition
and smaller parties a greater role in the legislative process. Under the
1975 amendments, one-third of the deputies can request the
Constitutional Court to review a law for constitutionality. Further,
one-third of the deputies can request the government's accounting agency
to conduct an audit of a government agency. These changes reflect the
intensification of political competition that occurred in the
Nationalrat after the long period of grand coalition governments between
the two major parties ended in 1966. The ÖVP, as the major opposition
party during the era of SPÖ rule (1970-83), led the drive for greater
rights for minority parties.
Austria - Bundesrat
The Constitutional Court decides the legality of treaties and the
constitutionality of laws and decrees passed at the federal, provincial,
and local levels. Cases involving courts and administrative agencies or
the Administrative Court and the Constitutional Court are heard in the
Constitutional Court. Individuals can present cases to the court if they
believe a decision of an administrative agency has violated their
constitutional rights. Monetary claims against the state, provinces,
administrative districts, or local communities that cannot be settled by
a regular court or an administrative agency are brought to the
Constitutional Court, as are claims regarding disputed elections. The
court also decides questions of impeachment and hears cases charging the
president with breaking a constitutional law or cases charging members
of federal or provincial governments with breaking a law.
The court is composed of a president, vice president, twelve judges,
and six alternates. The federal president, on recommendations from the
cabinet, appoints the court's president, vice president, six judges, and
three alternates. The federal president appoints six additional judges
and three more alternates based on nominations from the Nationalrat (for
three judges and two alternates) and the Bundesrat (for three judges and
one alternate). The constitution requires that three judges and two
alternates of the court, which sits in Vienna, live outside the city.
The president of the court chairs its meetings and decides on the
assignment of cases to individual judges. He does not have voting
rights, however. Cases are heard by five, nine, or all thirteen of the
judges and are decided by majority vote.
The selection of judges for the Constitutional Court has been
controlled by the ÖVP and the SPÖ. The two parties have applied the
principle of Proporz to filling vacancies on the court. Between
1945 and 1970, the ÖVP was the larger of the two parties in terms of
parliamentary strength, and it controlled seven of the judgeships with
voting rights; the SPÖ controlled six of the judgeships. Beginning in
1970, the ratio was reversed when the SPÖ gained more seats in the
parliament than the ÖVP.
Austria - The Administrative Court
On a lower level are seventeen regional courts having jurisdiction
over provincial and district matters. Boundaries of judicial districts
may or may not coincide with those of administrative districts. Regional
courts serve as courts of first instance for civil and criminal cases
carrying penalties of up to ten years' imprisonment and as appellate
courts for some cases from district courts. Justices usually sit as a
threeperson panel, but some cases can be heard by only one judge. Vienna
and Graz have separate courts for civil, criminal, and juvenile cases,
and Vienna also has a separate commercial court.
At the lowest level are about 200 district or local courts, which
decide minor civil and criminal cases, that is, those involving small
monetary value or minor misdemeanors. Questions involving such issues as
guardianship, adoption, legitimacy, probate, registry of lands, and
boundary disputes are also settled at this level. Depending on the
population of the area, the number of judges varies, but one judge can
decide a case. Civil and criminal matters are heard in separate courts
in Vienna and Graz. Vienna further divides civil courts into one for
commercial matters and one for other civil cases.
Ordinary court judges are chosen by the federal president or, if the
president so decides, by the minister for justice on the basis of
cabinet recommendations. The judiciary retains a potential voice in
naming judges, inasmuch as it must submit the names of two candidates
for each vacancy on the courts. The suggested candidates, however, need
not be chosen by the cabinet. Lay people have an important role in the
judicial system in cases involving crimes carrying severe penalties,
political felonies, and misdemeanors. The public can participate in
court proceedings as lay assessors or as jurors. Certain criminal cases
are subject to a hearing by two lay assessors and two judges. The lay
assessors and judges decide the guilt or innocence and punishment of a
defendant. If a jury, usually eight lay people, is used, the jury
decides the guilt of the defendant. Then jury and judges together
determine the punishment.
Civil servants have held a position of respect in Austrian society
since the formation of the civil service in the eighteenth century, when
it was considered to be "carrying out a mission for the
state." The civil service is highly regulated. Public servants take
an oath of office, promise obedience to their superiors, and pledge to
keep official matters secret. A civil servant may neither join an
association nor be employed in another job that could be interpreted as
unworthy of his or her position.
Besides the high esteem in which the civil service is held, job
security is also an attractive feature. Periodic raises are automatic,
and promotions are scheduled at regular intervals. The retirement
pension is adequate. A civil servant may be dismissed only for serious
misconduct.
During the grand coalition of 1945-66, the ÖVP and SPÖ introduced
the system of Proporz into the civil service. Prior to the
founding of the Second Republic, the civil service had been dominated by
ÖVP members, and thus after 1945 special steps were taken to recruit
persons with ties to the SPÖ. The two parties came to exercise almost
complete control of the personnel of the ministries that they controlled
in the cabinet. During the period of single-party rule (1966-83), the
importance of political allegiance came to play a lesser role in the
selection process of the civil service. Chancellor Kreisky made sure
that a large number of persons without party affiliation were appointed
to high-level positions in the civil service.
Reforms also were introduced in this period to make the civil service
better able to attract highly qualified people. In 1975 a civil service
training academy was established, and after 1980 some top positions were
changed to fixed-term appointments. Further changes were made to give
equal opportunity for career advancement to all members of the civil
service, regardless of their specialty. Traditionally, people with legal
training had a decided advantage in rising to the top of the system. As
of 1993, the government was working on a comprehensive reform of the
civil service system.
Austria - Provincial Government
Each of the nine provinces has its own constitution, which prescribes
its governmental organization. Common to each province is an elected
Landtag (provincial legislature), which is popularly elected on the
basis of proportional representation. According to the federal
constitution, the number of deputies can range from thirty-six to
sixty-five, depending on the population of the province. Vienna, which
is simultaneously a province and a city, is in a special category--its
legislature has 100 deputies. A Landtag is subject to dissolution by the
federal president at the cabinet's request. This process requires the
consent of the Bundesrat. One-half of the Bundesrat's deputies must be
present and cast a two-thirds vote in favor of the action.
The Landtag elects an executive composed of a governor and
councilors. A deputy is elected to serve in the absence of the governor.
Candidates for these positions must meet eligibility requirements of the
Landtag, although they need not belong to it. Elections to the Landtag
occur every five years, except in Upper Austria, where they are held
every six years. Legislative periods can be shortened and elections held
if the Landtag votes to dissolve itself.
Provincial constitutions can be amended, provided that changes do not
conflict with the federal constitution. Passage of a constitutional
amendment requires the presence of at least onehalf of the Landtag's
members and a two-thirds majority vote. Regulations for passage of other
provincial laws vary, but generally the procedure requires a vote by the
Landtag, verification that the proper procedure has been followed, the
countersignature of the prescribed official, and publication in the
provincial law gazette. Before a law is published, the federal minister
whose jurisdiction covers the area of the proposed law has to be
informed of the province's action. The cabinet then has eight weeks to
notify the province if the bill interferes with federal interests. The
Landtag can override the federal government's objections by voting again
in favor of the bill with at least one-half of its members present. The
federal government would probably appeal to the Constitutional Court if
it strenuously objected to a provincial law.
The provinces have a restricted ability to raise taxes. They may not
tax items already subject to federal taxation. Every four to six years,
the federal government, the provinces, and the municipalities negotiate
a Finance Equalization Law that determines how tax revenues raised at
the federal and provincial levels are to be divided. This system ensures
that the provinces are fully compensated for the many federal programs
that they implement.
Article 15 (1) of the federal constitution states that matters not
expressly reserved to the federal government come under the jurisdiction
of the provinces. Matters in which the provinces have primary
jurisdiction include local police, primary education, housing, health,
and protection of the environment. If a provincial government believes
that some federal action is infringing on its jurisdiction, it can
appeal to the Constitutional Court for a ruling.
Provisions exist for interprovincial coordination of policies by
means of compacts and treaties. Such coordination, however, is feasible
only if the matters at hand are among the autonomous rights of the
provinces. This manner of cooperation has rarely occurred. Instead,
conferences of provincial officials are held to plan less formal methods
of cooperation. The federal government must be notified of
interprovincial action.
Austria - Local Government
Provinces are divided into districts and local communities. The
primary function of district governments is to administer federal
programs. They do not have the power of taxation. A district is headed
by a district commissioner, usually a career civil servant, who is
appointed by the provincial governor. Local communities are
self-governing, having a popularly elected community council that is
chosen by proportional representation on the basis of political party
strength. The number of representatives ranges from seven to 100,
depending on the population. Members serve a five- or six-year term as
determined by provincial regulations. Community council meetings are
presided over by a mayor, elected by and responsible to the community
council.
The federal government or a province may delegate some functions to a
local government. Otherwise, local communities deal with matters of
local concern, such as safety, traffic, police, settlement of disputes
that are not dealt with by the courts, public utilities, cultural
institutions, public housing, and health care services.
Local actions, whether autonomous or delegated, are in the long run
usually subject to provincial or federal supervision or controls.
Administrative and legal regulations on the provincial and federal
levels are so pervasive that even decisions that are considered the sole
responsibility of local communities are actually limited. Local
communities, however, have recourse to the Administrative Court and the
Constitutional Court if they believe that their rights are being
infringed.
Austria - Electoral System
The electoral system is based on the principle of proportional
representation. The system's basic outline was established in the
constitution of 1920, although significant changes were made in 1970 and
1992. Among other changes, the amendments of 1970 raised the number of
seats in the Nationalrat from 165 to 183.
The 1992 reform of the election law, which went into effect in May
1993, alters the electoral system for the Nationalrat in a number of
significant ways. It divides the country into nine provincial electoral
districts that correspond to the country's nine provinces. These
districts contain a further forty-three regional electoral districts.
The creation of the small regional electoral districts is intended to
foster a greater feeling of connection between voters and those who
represent them in parliament. The law also aims to personalize elections
by giving voters greater power than before of electing individual
candidates of the party of their choice by voting directly for them
rather than for the party list of candidates as a whole. This reform may
reduce the power of party leaders to impose their preselected candidates
on the electorate. The law also modifies vote-counting procedures to
ensure that the number of parliamentary seats won by a party will
conform more closely with votes cast. Lastly, the law attempts to
prevent a proliferation of small parties sitting in the Nationalrat by
barring a party from that body if it has not won at least 4 percent of
votes cast nationwide. However, a party can be represented in parliament
by winning at least one seat in a regional electoral district.
According to the 1992 law, votes in Nationalrat elections are counted
in three stages, although a voter casts only one ballot. On this ballot,
the voter indicates the party of his choice, and then, if he wishes, he
may choose two candidates from this party, one to be elected from the
regional voting district and one from the provincial voting district.
Votes going to a preferred candidate are called preferential votes. In
the first stage of counting votes, the returns from regional voting
districts are examined; in the second stage, those from provincial
voting districts are examined. In these first two stages, the Hare
system is used to determine the proportional allocation of seats. In the
third stage of counting votes, candidates on the national party list are
allocated seats according to the d'Hondt method.
A party must win a parliamentary seat in the first stage of vote
counting in order to win seats in the second and third stages. A
candidate who receives preferential votes amounting to at least
one-sixth of the votes his party receives wins a parliamentary seat.
This is also the case for a candidate who receives preferential votes
amounting to at least one-half the electoral quota (Wahlzahl),
that is, the number of valid ballots in a voting district divided by the
number of parliamentary seats allotted to it. The vote tallying
procedures established by the new law mean that about ninety
parliamentary seats come from regional voting districts, about
sixty-five from provincial voting districts, and roughly twenty-five
from the federal level. All persons aged nineteen and over by January 1
of the year in which the election is held are eligible to vote. Voter
participation has traditionally been very high. In national elections,
it has fallen below 90 percent only once (in 1990, when it stood at 86
percent). Voting always takes place on a Sunday.
Austria - POLITICAL DYNAMICS
Between the end of World War II and the late 1980s, when some new
trends became evident, Austria's political system seemed stable and
unchangeable. Most political scientists considered Austria a classic
case of constitutional democracy, that is, a political system in which
cohesive social groups are closely identified with political parties.
According to this theory, Austrian politics, business, and society in
general were decisively shaped by the influence of three major social
camps, or subcultures (Lager)--the socialist, the
Catholicconservative , and the German-nationalist.
The most important factors in determining to which subculture a
person belonged were geographic location (rural or urban), socioeconomic
status, and professional occupation. The socialist camp had its basis in
the urban working class of Vienna and other cities and in the
intellectual class. The Catholic-conservative camp had its traditional
base in the small towns and farming communities of Austria and was
almost exclusively Roman Catholic. The German-nationalist camp was
smaller than the other two subcultures and was founded on the enthusiasm
for union with Germany that was prevalent during the years of the First
Republic (1918-38). A high percentage of its members came from
whitecollar professions.
Austria's subcultures provided their members with a selfcontained
milieu in which to pursue their lives and a variety of occupations. In
addition to the political parties aligned with the Lager, each
camp featured professional and trade organizations that played an
important role in party politics and in society as well.
This traditional system has continued into the 1990s. In 1993, in the
socialist camp, the key organizations affiliated with the SPÖ were the
Group of Socialist Trade Unionists (Fraktion Sozialistischer
Gewerkschaftler--FSG), the Free Business Association of Austria (Freier
Wirtschaftsverband Österreichs--FWB), and the SPÖ Farmers (SPÖ-Bauern).
In the Catholic-conservative camp, the chief organizations of the ÖVP
were the League of Austrian Workers and Salaried Employees (Österreichischer
Arbeiter- und Angestelltenbund--ÖAAB), the League of Austrian Business
(Österreichischer Wirtschaftsbund-- ÖWB), and the League of Austrian
Farmers (Österreichischer Bauernbund--ÖBB). The German-nationalist
camp, which is represented by the FPÖ, had only one auxiliary
organization of note as of 1993, the Circle of Free Business Persons
(Ring Freiheitlicher Wirtschaftstreibender--RFW).
A key source of influence for the professional and trade
organizations is their control of the chambers of agriculture, commerce,
and labor. In the Austrian corporatist system, the chambers are assigned
responsibility for implementing certain aspects of economic laws and
regulations. Moreover, membership in the chambers is obligatory for
persons employed in a wide range of occupations. Thus, the professional
and trade organizations and the chambers are assured a large amount of
influence in the public realm. The ÖVP dominates the Chamber of
Agriculture through the ÖAAB and the Chamber of Commerce through the ÖWB.
The SPÖ has a controlling influence in the Chamber of Labor through the
FSG.
The Austrian system of interests was dominated by the socialist and
Catholic-conservative camps for virtually the entire postwar period.
During the early years of the Second Republic, politicians of the SPÖ
and ÖVP were adamant about the need for political consensus and
compromise. One overriding reason for the emergence of a system designed
to avoid conflict was the negative experience of the 1930s, when the
political parties clashed so vehemently that they ended up fighting a
short civil war in 1934. During the period of Nazi rule, many Austrian
politicians found themselves imprisoned alongside their political
opponents. This shared fate convinced the country's political elite of
the imperative for consensus in postwar Austria. From 1945 to 1966, the
country was ruled by the grand coalition formed by the ÖVP and the SPÖ,
an astonishing duration of a series of governments composed of Austria's
two main political competitors. The cumulative effect of a variety of
changes in Austrian society in the postwar era has led many political
scientists to conclude that the strength of the political camps, or Lager,
has weakened significantly. A major shift in the way people earn their
livelihood--a decline in farming and manufacturing and a growth in the
services sector--has weakened the hold of the Lager on voters.
An increasingly secularized society has lessened the influence of the
Roman Catholic Church. An increased sense of Austria's existence as a
nation (up from less than 50 percent in the mid-1960s to 74 percent in
one poll in 1990) has reduced the political potency of pan-Germanism.
And the growth of the suburbs and the transformation of rural areas by <>
tourism
have reduced the homogeneity of traditional SPÖ and ÖVP
enclaves.
The propensity toward what political scientists call electoral
dealignment, that is, the breakdown of long-standing voter loyalties,
was bound to have effects on Austrian voting behavior, and by 1986 the
first signs of change were evident. In the parliamentary election of
that year, the combined vote for the ÖVP and SPÖ fell to 84 percent,
the first time since 1962 that it had dropped below 90 percent. The
party benefiting the most from the losses by the major parties was the
FPÖ, which doubled its vote. Moreover, for the first time ever, members
of the Green political movement entered parliament.
Although the 1990 election did not lead to a change in government
(because the ÖVP and SPÖ had renewed their grand coalition in 1987),
it nevertheless marked a watershed in Austrian political history. For
the first time in the Second Republic, the status of the ÖVP as a major
party was placed in doubt. Whereas in the 1986 election the ÖVP
received only 88,000 fewer votes than the SPÖ, in 1990 the difference
ballooned to more than 500,000. Under its colorful leader, Jörg Haider,
the FPÖ was changing the Austrian party system from one dominated by
two parties to one with multiparty possibilities.
The Social Democratic Party of Austria (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs--SPÖ),
until 1991 known as the Socialist Party of Austria (Sozialistische
Partei Österreichs--SPÖ), has its roots in the original Social
Democratic Workers' Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei--SDAP),
founded in 1889 by Viktor Adler, a young doctor. The SDAP supported
revisionist Marxism and the use of democratic methods to establish
workingclass rule in a democratic government. The SDAP was responsible
for pushing through universal voting rights for men in 1905 and for
extending the same for women in 1919. From 1934 to 1945, during the
regimes of Engelbert Dollfuss (1932-34) and Kurt von Schuschnigg
(1934-38) and the takeover by the Nazis, the SDAP was outlawed. In 1945
it was reconstituted as the Socialist Party of Austria. In 1991 the
party readopted the designation "Social Democratic."
Moderates such as Karl Renner and Adolf Schärf, each of whom
eventually served as president of the Second Republic, led the postwar
party. Their primary interests lay in increasing SPÖ power
in the coalition government rather than in fostering Marxism. Between
1945 and 1957, the party supported democratic practices and intraparty
cooperation, programs for higher wages and lower food prices, and
increased government spending on social programs.
The election of Bruno Pittermann as party chairman in 1957 marked the
beginning of major policy changes. The party had a strong following
among industrial workers, but party officials wanted to expand SPÖ
membership to the middle class and whitecollar workers and to soften the
party's anticlerical position in order to become acceptable to Roman
Catholics. These changes were expressed in a new party program adopted
in 1958. The program claimed that the SPÖ was "the party of all
those who work for a living," and it stated the party's opposition
to communism and fascism.
The late 1960s brought more changes in party doctrine. A new economic
program in 1967 constituted a shift from concern for the distribution of
wealth to concern for economic growth, including increasing foreign
investment in Austria. Cultural and social reforms were demanded, and
emphasis was placed on attending to the needs of young people. In line
with its appeal to youth, the party supported a plan to shorten the term
of military service.
Under Bruno Kreisky, who became chairman of the SPÖ in 1967, the
party continued its move toward the center of the ideological spectrum.
Although party platforms continued to refer to the classless society as
an ideal, the SPÖ was careful to distinguish its brand of socialism
from the centralized, inefficient version of Eastern Europe and the
Soviet Union. The party program of 1978 stressed the four principles of
freedom, equality, justice, and solidarity. Central to the SPÖ's
philosophy was a guarantee for all Austrians of freedom from fear,
hunger, exploitation, and unemployment. The freedom to pursue wealth had
to be balanced by the government's guarantee of equal opportunity and
social justice.
Under Kreisky the SPÖ triumphed at the polls in 1970, 1971, 1975,
and 1979, and between 1971 and 1983 the party enjoyed an absolute
majority in parliament. The Kreisky governments laid great emphasis on
improving the social welfare system and achieving full employment. The
Kreisky era also featured the flourishing of the technocrats--SPÖ
politicians successful in business and banking whose lavish life-styles
seemed incongruous in a party supposed to represent the interests of
labor.
In the parliamentary election of 1983, the SPÖ lost its absolute
majority, and Kreisky decided to retire from politics rather than
preside over a coalition government. Fred Sinowatz, Kreisky's minister
for education, was chosen as chancellor in a coalition government with
the FPÖ. The Sinowatz era, from 1983 to 1986, proved to be a short
interregnum and was not distinguished by any great achievements.
Franz Vranitzky, born in 1937, became chancellor in June 1986 when
Sinowatz resigned after the SPÖ lost the presidential election to Kurt
Waldheim. Vranitzky replaced Sinowatz as party chairman in May 1988,
becoming the first person from a workingclass background to hold this
position. Despite his working-class heritage, Vranitzky had had a
successful career in banking before entering politics.
Under Vranitzky the SPÖ moved to restore its image among
rank-and-file members by improving its methods of intraparty
communication. Computers and direct mail technology were used to gauge
the opinions of members in the provinces, and efforts were made to
improve recruiting techniques by means of recreational groups. In the
area of government policy, Vranitzky stressed that limits on state
activity were necessary, although he noted that health care and
education were fields where market forces had to be regulated.
Vranitzky displayed a more open attitude toward the question of
privatizing government industries than Kreisky had. To a large extent,
changes in this area were inevitable because of large losses in the
state industrial sector that came to light in 1985. Vranitzky embraced
the principle that privatization should be pursued if it would lead to
greater operational efficiency. The press dubbed Vranitzky's approach
"pinstripe socialism." The policy has proven to be a
responsible one and has been fairly popular with Austrians.
In 1984 the SPÖ launched a program called Perspectives '90, designed
to promote intraparty discussion on current issues. A major aim of the
leadership was to show that the party was eager to listen to grass-roots
concerns. A series of nationwide debates eventually led to the issuance
of a draft document in 1986 that incorporated the views of party members
on issues such as the environment, controls on the development of
technology, and democratization of society. Events that had embarrassed
the party, such as the conflict over the Hainburg power plant in 1984
and Minister for Defense Friedhelm Frischenschläger's reception of
Walter Reder in 1985, were also discussed.
An estimated 30,000 party members participated in the Perspectives
'90 meetings, which took place in 1,000 local groups. The success of
this project led the SPÖ to stage the Congress for the Future in Vienna
in the summer of 1987, where 400 of the party's top leaders and
intellectual luminaries discussed the outlook for social democracy. It
was agreed that the SPÖ needed to formulate an alternative to the
neoconservatism of the 1980s that would allow for greater
codetermination in the workplace but also avoid the pitfalls of too much
state control. After the success of this conference, the SPÖ began
planning another that would produce a Social Democratic Manifesto for
the Year 2000.
Membership in the SPÖ is direct (unlike the ÖVP, where a person
joins an organization affiliated with the party). SPÖ's membership grew
rapidly in the postwar period--from 360,000 members in 1946 to its peak
of nearly 720,000 members in 1979. With the loosening of the grip of the
Lager on Austrian society, SPÖ's membership has declined
slightly. In the early 1990s, it was estimated at 700,000.
Party organization remained centralized as of the early 1990s. The
main link between rank-and-file members and party leaders are the
activists known as Vertrauenspersonen, who personally collect
annual membership dues. At the local level, the SPÖ is represented by
almost 4,000 groups in villages and towns. Every two years, the SPÖ
holds a federal conference that elects the party executive, which has
sixty-five members. Because of the executive's unwieldy size, a smaller
group, known as the presidium, is selected from it and actually conducts
most party business.
Delegates to the federal conference are drawn from the various
suborganizations of the party. The party has two youth organizations,
the Young Generation (Junge Generation--JG) and the Socialist Youth of
Austria (Sozialistische Jugend Österreichs --SJÖ). The Group of
Socialist Trade Unionists (Fraktion Sozialistischer
Gewerkschaftler--FSG) sends fifty-two delegates to the conference. There
is also a Women's Committee, which has representatives from each
province. Over the years, women have consistently made up one-third of
SPÖ's membership. In 1985 the federal conference passed an amendment
providing for greater representation of women in the party and larger
numbers of female candidates. Progress toward this goal has been slow,
however, and in 1989 only eleven of the SPÖ's deputies in the
Nationalrat were female.
SPÖ candidates for parliamentary elections are determined by the
Party Council, whose members come from the nine provincial party
organizations. The party executive and the heads of the nine provincial
parties have an input into the selection process. Roughly one-fifth of
the places are reserved for high-ranking party officials, whose presence
in the Nationalrat is considered imperative.
Austria - The Austrian People's Party
The Austrian People's Party (Österreichische Volkspartei-- ÖVP) was
created in Vienna in 1945 by leaders of the former Christian Social
Party (Christlichsoziale Partei--CSP). The founders of the ÖVP made
sure that the new party was only loosely tied to the Roman Catholic
Church, unlike its predecessor. The ÖVP emerged as a conservative,
democratic party based on Christian values that sought to include
diverse interests. From 1945 to 1966, ÖVP politicians filled the post
of chancellor in a series of grand coalition governments with the SPÖ
(from 1945 to 1947, KPÖ members were also in the cabinet). From 1966 to
1970, the ÖVP ruled alone and thereafter entered a long period of
opposition to the SPÖ, which ended in early 1987 when the two parties
formed a new coalition government.
The ÖVP periodically has revised its party program. During the
1945-55 period, the party advocated low taxes, reduced government
expenditures, a balanced budget, and low wage increases. The ÖVP
favored a limited government role in the economy. After much debate, in
1965 the party adopted the Klagenfurt Manifesto, which referred to the
ÖVP as an "open people's party" of the "new
center." The manifesto laid less emphasis than previous ones on the
priority of personal property in a democracy. It also stressed the
importance of expanding economic welfare and educational opportunities
for all social groups.
After suffering losses in the 1970 parliamentary election, the ÖVP
entered the opposition for the first time. A wide-ranging discussion of
principles took place at all levels of the party. The outcome of this
process was the 1972 Salzburg Program, which described the ÖVP as a
"progressive center party" dedicated to integrating Austria's
different social groups. The program reaffirmed the party's commitment
to a free and independent country, a multiparty democracy, and a social
market economy combining free enterprise and some government
intervention. As of 1993, the Salzburg Program had not been replaced as
the basic statement of ÖVP ideology.
The ÖVP had a less centralized form of party organization than the
SPÖ as of the early 1990s. At the top is the party presidium, composed
of the party chairman, the chancellor and vice chancellor (if they are
members of the ÖVP), the general secretary, up to six deputies to the
chairman, the leader of the party's parliamentary faction, and eight
additional members drawn from the provinces and interest groups
affiliated with the party. The party holds a national conference at
least once every three years. Roughly 600 delegates from the provinces
and the party's auxiliary organizations attend the conference, which
elects the party chairman, the deputies, and the general secretary.
The auxiliary organizations play important roles in the ÖVP's
internal workings. The key organizations are the League of Austrian
Workers and Salaried Employees (Österreichischer Arbeiter- und
Angestelltenbund--ÖAAB), the League of Austrian Business (Österreichischer
Wirtschaftsbund--ÖWB), and the League of Austrian Farmers (Österreichischer
Bauernbund--ÖBB). These organizations represent the ÖVP in the
chambers of labor, commerce, and agriculture, respectively. Until 1980
the leaders of these three groups were automatically placed on the party
presidium. However, this practice was abandoned after many party members
complained about undue influence by interest groups over ÖVP affairs.
This reform was yet another indication of the erosion in the influence
of the traditional Lager over Austrian society.
The majority of ÖVP members acquire party membership indirectly via
one of the auxiliary organizations. Because of indirect membership, it
is difficult to arrive at a precise figure for total membership in the
ÖVP. At the beginning of the 1990s, the combined membership of the
three leagues was about 800,000. Adding to this figure members of the
women's, youth, and senior organizations, a total membership of 1.2
million was attained. However, the ÖVP's actual membership was about
onethird smaller than this because many individuals belonged to more
than one league or subgroup.
The independence of auxiliary organizations affiliated with the ÖVP
means that there is a fairly high degree of intraparty disagreement over
policies compared with the SPÖ and other Austrian parties. One major
cleavage exists between the ÖAAB, which represents the interests of
working people in the ÖVP, and the ÖWB, which speaks for business
interests. The farmers' group, the ÖBB, has clashed with the ÖWB over
the issue of whether Austria should join the European Union. Tensions between the wings of the party remained high even in
the early 1990s, despite numerous partywide discussions of ideology
designed to bring about consensus. Some experts believe that the
cohesion of the Catholic-conservative Lager will be endangered
if the ÖVP does not achieve a higher degree of party unity than that
prevailing in 1993.
Alois Mock, who came from Lower Austria, one of the party's
strongholds, held the position of party chairman from 1979 to 1989. As
the party struggled with declining vote totals, many in the ÖVP
concluded that his uncharismatic leadership style was a hindrance to a
recovery at the polls. Mock withstood pressure for his ouster after the
party's poor performance in the national election of 1986, and his
stature temporarily increased when he became vice chancellor and foreign
minister in the coalition government formed in early 1987 with the SPÖ.
Discontent with Mock resurfaced quickly, however, and there were also
disturbing signs of party disunity. After the heavy losses incurred by
the ÖVP in the provincial elections in the spring of 1989, Mock's
opponents pressed again for his resignation. At an emergency summit in
April 1989, Mock was finally convinced to step down as party chairman.
He also relinquished the post of vice chancellor. His replacement in
both positions was Josef Riegler, a member of the ÖBB from Styria.
Riegler had served as agriculture minister between 1987 and 1989 and
was known as a consensus seeker who would be able to get along well with
the SPÖ. Riegler was also interested in developing new approaches to
environmental problems, and many in the party hoped this would help the
ÖVP regain some of the voters who had deserted it for the
environmental, or Green, parties.
However, the devastating results of the October 1990 national
election, in which the ÖVP's share of the vote declined by 9 percent,
proved that the party's problems went much deeper than who held the post
of party chairman. In May 1991, Riegler decided not to run again for the
party chairmanship. Erhard Busek, a well-known ÖVP politician who had
headed the party's Vienna branch between 1976 and 1989, won the election
to succeed Riegler. At the same time, the party conference voted to
reduce the number of the chairman's deputies from six to two, a sign
that party members wanted to curb the influence of the interest groups.
Austria - The Freedom Party of Austria
The Freedom Party of Austria (Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs--FPÖ)
was founded in 1956 by Anton Reinthaller, who had served in the
Seyss-Inquart national socialist government formed in collaboration with
Hitler after the Anschluss in 1938. Anticlerical and pro-German, the FPÖ
was the party of persons who were uncomfortable with the domination of
Austrian politics by the "red-black" (socialist-clerical)
coalition governments of the SPÖ and ÖVP. The party had liberal and
nationalist wings, which frequently disagreed over strategy. Although
the FPÖ was not an extremist party, it attracted many former Nazis with
its philosophy that Austrians should think of themselves as belonging to
a greater German cultural community.
The FPÖ's stress on nationalism made it an atypical liberal party.
Nevertheless, in 1979 the FPÖ was admitted to Liberal International,
the worldwide group of liberal parties. The FPÖ's ideology emphasized
the preservation of individual liberties in the face of the growth of
the state's power. The party enthusiastically endorsed free enterprise
and individual initiative and opposed a larger role for the state in the
ownership of enterprises. The FPÖ was also against the socialist idea
of striving for greater equality between socioeconomic groups.
After Reinthaller's death in 1958, Friedrich Peter became the head of
the FPÖ. Under his leadership, the liberal wing increased its
influence, and ties to the SPÖ were developed. However, the FPÖ
remained a minor party with a limited opposition role in the parliament.
Between 1956 and 1983, the FPÖ's share of the vote stagnated between
5.0 and 7.7 percent. After the election of 1970, the FPÖ struck a deal
with the SPÖ, which promised electoral reform in exchange for the FPÖ's
support of Kreisky's minority government. The ensuing changes in the
electoral laws helped the FPÖ increase its representation in parliament
in subsequent elections, despite the fact that its vote totals did not
rise at the same time. Peter's hope that he could make the FPÖ
attractive to the SPÖ as a coalition partner was dashed by Kreisky's
success in obtaining absolute majorities in the elections of 1971, 1975,
and 1979. It was only in 1983, when the SPÖ lost its majority, that it
turned to the FPÖ to form a government. The FPÖ's brief three-year
experience in power in the SPÖ-FPÖ coalition of 1983-86 was mostly
frustrating, as the government stumbled from one crisis to the next.
Norbert Steger was FPÖ party chairman between 1980 and 1986. A
member of the party's liberal wing, Steger served as vice chancellor and
minister for trade in the SPÖ-FPÖ coalition. He was not a charismatic
politician, and, as the coalition's troubles mounted, he began to lose
support among the party's rank and file. At an FPÖ convention in the
spring of 1986, Jörg Haider, leader of the Carinthian branch of the
party, launched a successful coup against Steger and became the new
chairman.
Haider, born in 1950, is a handsome, dashing figure whose
self-confidence strikes many observers as verging on arrogance. He comes
from the nationalist wing of the party and has stirred controversy on
many occasions by his remarks about Austria's proper place in the German
cultural community. On one occasion in 1988, Haider referred to Austria
as "an ideological deformity." Since Haider took control of
the FPÖ in 1986, the party has achieved dramatic gains at the polls in
both national and provincial elections. In the March 1989 provincial
election in Carinthia, the FPÖ displaced the ÖVP as the second
strongest party, and Haider was elected governor of the province with
votes from the ÖVP. This election marked the first time that a
provincial governor was not from either of the two major parties.
Haider's term as governor was cut short in June 1991 by the controversy
unleashed by his remark during a parliamentary debate that the Third
Reich's employment policy was a positive model. The ÖVP and SPÖ joined
together to pass a vote of no confidence against Haider, marking the
first time in the history of the Second Republic that a governor was
forced to step down. Haider did not allow this setback to create
challenges to his leadership of the party. In three provincial elections
in the fall of 1991, Haider led the FPÖ to outstanding showings,
proving that Austrian voters were increasingly ready to vote for
alternatives to the two major parties.
A less charitable interpretation of the FPÖ's rise under Haider is
that Austrian politics has taken a turn to the right. At times in his
career, Haider has given his critics ample reason for accusing him of
neo-Nazi tendencies. He has frequently pandered to the sentiments of the
far right, but his everyday political discourse is more moderate. Haider
tailors his remarks to his audiences, and he resorts to the rhetoric of
right-wing populism in order to inspire the conservative nationalists in
the FPÖ.
A major element in Haider's prescriptions for Austria is his desire
to cut down drastically on the number of foreigners allowed to live in
the country. Haider consistently argues that immigration is excessive
and is causing serious problems for Austrian citizens in the areas of
jobs and housing. Haider's campaign against foreigners was a major
reason for the passage of a 1991 law that decreed that foreign workers
could not make up more than 10 percent of the work force. In 1993 this
ceiling was reduced to 9 percent when a new law, the Resident Alien Law,
went into effect. Early in the same year, Haider sponsored a referendum
to further tighten the control over the number of foreigners in Austria.
Although he got only half of the 800,000 signatures he sought, the
language Haider used in his campaign was extreme enough to cause large
counterdemonstrations.
The tensions between Haider and the liberal wing of the party caused
five FPÖ members of the Nationalrat to leave the party in early 1993
and form a new party, The Liberal Forum (Das Liberale Forum). Led by the
FPÖ's 1992 presidential candidate, Heide Schmidt, the group won seats
in the Upper Austria provincial elections of May 1993. The new party was
also recognized by Liberal International, which was expected to expel
Haider's FPÖ from its ranks in 1994 because it advocated policies
incompatible with traditional European liberalism.
Despite these setbacks, Haider is expected to remain a formidable
force in Austrian politics. His sense for the issues that trouble many
voters and his ability to enunciate views too extreme for the larger
parties will likely win him a substantial following during the rest of
the 1990s as the country struggles to adapt to post-Cold War conditions.
Membership in the FPÖ is direct (there is no tradition of joining an
organization affiliated with the party, as with the SPÖ). The party's
membership grew from 22,000 in 1959 to 40,000 in 1990. The
membership-voter ratio declined as the party made dramatic gains at the
polls. The FPÖ's share of the vote in national elections tripled
between 1983 and 1990, when it achieved 16.6 percent. The FPÖ has a
strong base of support in the provinces of Carinthia and Salzburg. The
party draws much of its support from the middle class, salaried
employees, and the self-employed. More than 60 percent of its voters are
under the age of forty-four, and many are well educated. The party has
few auxiliary organizations, in comparison with the ÖVP and the SPÖ.
In addition to an organization for people in business, it has groups for
academics, students, and retired persons. The FPÖ's party structure is
decentralized, and provincial organizations play an important role in
party affairs. The party chairman, who is elected by the party
conference, chooses the party manager and general secretary. The general
secretary acts as a liaison between federal leaders and provincial
organizations.
Austria - The Green Parties
Another clear sign that the Austrian party system is loosening up was
the emergence during the early 1980s of organized environmental, or
Green, parties. A major catalyst in the birth of the Green movement in
Austria was the narrow defeat of the November 5, 1978, national
referendum on nuclear energy. The Kreisky government, seeking to build a
nuclear power plant in Zwentendorf near Vienna, decided to let the
people decide on the question of nuclear energy.
The victory of the antinuclear forces encouraged environmental
activists to run in local elections, and in 1982 two national Green
parties were formed. The more moderate of the two, the United Greens of
Austria (Vereinigte Grüne Österreichs-- VGÖ), had a strong commitment
to working within the existing political system to change environmental
policies. The Alternative List of Austria (Alternative Liste Österreichs--ALÖ),
founded in 1982 on the fourth anniversary of the Zwentendorf referendum,
was more willing to challenge the political status quo. In addition to
championing radical changes in environmental policy, the ALÖ also
advocated a guaranteed national income, a thirty-five-hour workweek, and
greater government ownership in certain areas of the economy.
The prospects of the Green parties are limited by their frequent
inability to form alliances for the purpose of contesting elections.
When the ALÖ and VGÖ have campaigned on a common ticket, they usually
have won seats in parliament. In 1983, the first national election in
which the Green parties participated, the two groups ran on separate
lists, and both failed to gain representation in the Nationalrat. The
Green cause received a strong boost in 1984 from the confrontation
between the SPÖ-FPÖ government and environmental activists opposed to
the plan to build a hydroelectric plant in a wetland forest at Hainburg
in eastern Austria. The government backed down from its plan, and the
incident led to an increase in support for the Green parties from
disillusioned SPÖ voters, intellectuals, and others with strong views
on the environment.
Green activist Freda Meissner-Blau ran in the May 1986 presidential
election, taking a surprising 5.5 percent of the vote, which
necessitated a run off between the ÖVP and SPÖ candidates. Encouraged
by this showing, the ALÖ and VGÖ, after long negotiations, agreed to
participate in the November 1986 national election on a single list,
named the Green Alternative-- Freda Meissner-Blau List. The Green
Alternative took 4.8 percent of the vote and won eight seats in
parliament. This marked only the second time in the history of the
Second Republic that a fourth party had entered the Nationalrat. (The KPÖ
had been in the parliament between 1945 and 1959.) The harmony between
the two groups was short-lived, however, as they clashed over how to
divide the federal financing that became available to the Green
movement. In the 1990 national election, the VGÖ put up its own list of
candidates, and the ALÖ ran as the Green Alternative/Greens in
Parliament (Grüne Alternative/Grüne in Parliament--GAL). The VGÖ
polled only 1.9 percent of the vote and failed to win any seats. The GAL
took 4.5 percent of the vote and increased the number of Green deputies
to ten.
As of the early 1990s, the future of Green politics in Austria
remained uncertain because of the strong differences between the GAL and
VGÖ over political strategy. The VGÖ was committed to developing a
centralized party structure along the lines of the ÖVP and SPÖ, while
the ALÖ preferred to allow complete autonomy for its affiliated
organizations in the provinces. There were also questions about the
longevity of the Greens' appeal to voters. Studies indicated that only
50 percent of Green voters had close ties to a Green party, and roughly
35 percent of Green votes came from floating voters who had abandoned
the two major parties. However, many Austrians felt a lack of confidence
in the abilities of the ÖVP and SPÖ to fashion constructive policies,
and as long as this doubt persists, the Green parties will have
opportunities to elect deputies to parliament.
Austria - Political Developments since 1983
In 1983 a thirteen-year period of single-party rule by the SPÖ came
to an end. The period had been dominated by Bruno Kreisky, who served as
chancellor for the entire time. With Kreisky as its leader, the SPÖ
had emerged from the election in 1970 as the strongest party. This
election marked a turning point in Austrian history because never before
had a socialist party been given such a mandate by the voters. The
outcome was conclusive proof that most Austrians had lost their fear of
the SPÖ's being too leftist to govern alone.
SPÖ-FPÖ Coalition, 1983-86
In the election of 1983, the SPÖ lost its absolute majority in the
Nationalrat, although it remained the largest party. Kreisky fulfilled his pledge to resign
as chancellor if the SPÖ lost its undisputed position in parliament.
Fred Sinowatz, a rather colorless figure who had been minister for
education under Kreisky, was selected as the new chancellor. The SPÖ
decided to form a coalition with the FPÖ, marking the first time ever
that the FPÖ had joined the government. Norbert Steger, the moderate
chairman of the FPÖ, was named vice chancellor and minister for
economic affairs, and other members of his party became minister for
defense and minister for justice.
The SPÖ-FPÖ coalition lasted only three years and was not very
productive. It faced a series of crises that never allowed it to become
firmly established. Although the coalition had made progress on
environmental protection a high priority, its decision to build a
hydroelectric plant at Hainburg in a wetland forest east of Vienna
provoked a storm of opposition from environmental activists. In the end,
the government decided to cancel the project.
The coalition's image received another black mark in 1985 when FPÖ
Minister for Defense Friedhelm Frischenschläger staged a welcoming
ceremony at the airport for Walter Reder, a former Waffen SS member who
had been serving a life sentence for executing civilians during World
War II before being pardoned by the Italians. Some SPÖ members of the
cabinet threatened to resign over this affair, but Frischenschläger was
allowed to remain in his post. This incident hurt the SPÖ's standing
among its own members, as well as among independent voters.
Austria received further unpleasant jolts in 1985. First came the
news that diethylene glycol, a chemical used in antifreeze, had been
added to Austrian wines in potentially lethal amounts. The wines
affected came from Burgenland, the home province of Chancellor Sinowatz.
Even more damaging to the country's selfimage , however, was the crisis
in the state-run industrial sector that came to light at roughly the
same time. The government announced that it had uncovered a financial
scandal at the United Austrian Iron and Steel Works (Vereinigte Österreichische
Eisenund Stahlwerke--VÖEST; commonly known as VÖEST-Alpine) in Linz.
Public funds were required to cover large losses incurred through risky
and unauthorized speculation in oil ventures. Moreover, the entire state
industrial sector required streamlining, and jobs had to be cut.
The method of staffing these industries was a prime example of the ÖVP
and SPÖ's Proporz system, which created fiefdoms in which
political affiliations were the main criteria for filling high-level
management positions. The crisis in this sector of the economy revealed
that the Kreisky governments had been guilty of serious mismanagement.
The confidence of the SPÖ in particular was shaken as it faced the need
for privatization and layoffs. The government abolished the Proporz
system at VÖEST-Alpine and appointed new management to rectify the
problems.
Austria - Election of Kurt Waldheim as President
As the scrutiny of Waldheim intensified, Austrians became polarized
over whether to defend or criticize him. Many older Austrians,
particularly those who had served in the German army, agreed with his
self-defense that he had merely done his duty in a war that Austria had
not wished for. Others became more suspicious of Waldheim when
documentary evidence was produced suggesting that he may have joined the
Nazi Party to further his chances for a diplomatic career. The
presidential campaign degenerated into a mudslinging affair, and the ÖVP
launched attacks against the character of the SPÖ candidate.
Despite the furor surrounding him, on May 4, 1986, Waldheim outpolled
Steyrer by 49.7 to 43.7 percent. He fell only 16,000 votes short of the
absolute majority required for victory, and thus a runoff between the
two top candidates was scheduled for June 8. Waldheim won the runoff
handily, garnering 54 percent of the vote. Steyrer's candidacy had been
handicapped by his membership in a government burdened by financial
mismanagement of state industries and other scandals. Waldheim benefited
from a wave of sympathy from certain segments of the Austrian
electorate, who viewed him as a victim of unfair attacks.
The Waldheim presidency proved to be a major burden for Austria. In
April 1987, after a one-year study of the matter by the United States
Department of Justice, the United States placed Waldheim on its
"watch list" of undesirable aliens. The department had
concluded that there was "a prima facie case that Kurt Waldheim
assisted or otherwise participated in the persecution of persons because
of race, religion, national origin, or political opinion." Waldheim
became the first active chief of state ever to be placed on the list of
40,000 subversives, terrorists, and criminals. Waldheim became isolated
internationally and found support only from the Soviet Union, some of
the communist governments of Eastern Europe, and Arab states such as
Jordan, one of the few countries he was to visit during his presidency.
In June 1987, the Viennese branch of the SPÖ passed a resolution
calling for Waldheim to resign. Chancellor Vranitzky and Sinowatz, the
chairman of the SPÖ, defended Waldheim, arguing that he had been
elected democratically. Strains were beginning to appear within the ÖVP-SPÖ
coalition over the affair, and somehow a resolution needed to be brought
about. In an effort to achieve this resolution, the Austrian government
announced that it would appoint an international panel of historians and
human rights experts to examine the whole matter.
The panel presented its findings in February 1988. The panel found no
direct evidence that Waldheim had participated in war crimes during his
military service in the Balkans and Greece. However, it concluded that
he must have had some knowledge that atrocities were taking place.
Predictably, Waldheim took the panel's report as his exoneration, as did
most ÖVP leaders. The president gave a speech in which he said he
believed it to be in the best interests of Austria that he remain in
office.
The release of the panel's report came one month before the fiftieth
anniversary of the Anschluss of March 1938. At a public commemoration of
this event in Vienna, Vranitzky solemnly informed the Austrian people
that it was time for all of them to face up to the fact that their
country had been not only the first victim of Nazi aggression but also a
participant in Hitler's military conquests. Waldheim gave a television
address in which he described the Holocaust as one of the greatest
tragedies of history and admitted that Austrians had played a role in
it. He condemned fanaticism and intolerance and expounded on Austria's
dual role as victim and culprit. For Waldheim's critics, it was a
respectable performance, but woefully late. Austrian emotions had been
rubbed raw by the Waldheim affair, but at least it presented Austrians
with an opportunity to discuss openly issues that had effectively been
taboo for fifty years.
The election of Waldheim had a large impact on Austrian domestic
politics as well. After Waldheim's victory, Sinowatz, the SPÖ
chancellor who had been perceived as ineffective, resigned, and the SPÖ
turned to Franz Vranitzky to fill the top position. Vranitzky decided to
dissolve the SPÖ-FPÖ coalition when the leadership of the junior party
was usurped in September 1986 by Jörg Haider. Haider was prone to
making controversial remarks about Austria's place in the greater German
cultural identity, and Vranitzky had little hesitation in cutting the SPÖ's
ties to the FPÖ under its new leader. This action led to a premature
parliamentary election in November 1986. Pressures for an early election
also came from the financial failures in the state industrial sector
that had embarrassed the SPÖ-FPÖ government.
The outcome of the election was a shock to both major parties, as the
FPÖ attained its highest vote total since 1953, receiving 9.7 percent.
The SPÖ lost ten seats in the Nationalrat, dropping to eighty, and the
ÖVP lost four, declining to seventyseven . After lengthy negotiations,
in early 1987 the two major parties decided to form a grand coalition
for the first time since 1966. Vranitzky remained chancellor, and Alois
Mock, leader of the ÖVP, became vice chancellor and foreign minister.
The two parties agreed to split the remaining cabinet posts, with the
Ministry for Justice going to a person with no party affiliation. Former
Chancellor Kreisky complained loudly about Vranitzky's giving the
foreign ministry portfolio to the ÖVP, and he resigned as honorary
chairman of the SPÖ in protest.
The new grand coalition was not able to function in the cozy way the
old grand coalition had because media scrutiny was much greater in the
1980s than it had been between 1945 and 1966. Further, one of the
coalition's top priorities was to address the problems in the state
industrial sector and the budget deficit in general. The government
carried out job cutbacks and early retirement programs at VÖEST-Alpine,
the state-run iron and steel conglomerate, and also reduced subsidies to
farmers. These policies hurt key interests of both parties' core
constituencies, but ÖVP and SPÖ leaders saw little alternative to
tackling these problems head on. Austrian politics had entered a new
stage that was short on the optimism of the Kreisky era and focused on
pragmatic and hard-headed solutions to economic problems.
The ÖVP-SPÖ government benefited from improving economic
conditions, especially from 1988 onward. Economic growth for the years
1988-90 averaged around 4 percent annually. Other economic indicators
were also positive, with unemployment averaging around 5 percent and
inflation running at 2.5 percent. In the political realm, however, the
coalition was plagued by numerous scandals involving primarily
high-ranking officials of the SPÖ. In late 1988 and early 1989, two of
these officials were forced to resign for large-scale tax evasion.
Chancellor Vranitzky, who had replaced Sinowatz as party chairman in May
1988, initially was hesitant to fire his friend Günther Sallaberger,
who had failed to pay taxes on S1.8 million. Pressure to remove Sallaberger became intense after party
members were shocked to learn that he was an example of a trend in which
holders of multiple posts within the SPÖ were actually earning more
money than the chancellor.
An even larger scandal emerged when the SPÖ became embroiled in an
insurance scandal centering on Udo Proksch, the notorious former owner
of Demel's, Vienna's most famous coffee house and meetingplace for SPÖ
bigwigs. A ship commissioned by Proksch, the Lucona, had sunk
in 1977 with the loss of six crew members. Proksch claimed that the ship
had been carrying a uranium processing plant, but documents describing
the ship's cargo were found to have been forged, and Proksch was accused
of deliberately sinking the vessel. The investigation into the affair
moved at a snail's pace. By early 1989, a parliamentary committee that
had been formed to look into the case began to focus on two leading SPÖ
officials, Minister for Interior Karl Blecha and Leopold Gratz, the
first president of the Nationalrat.
The committee's investigations provided some of the most dramatic
political theater ever seen in the Second Republic. After tough
cross-examinations of subordinate officials, the committee and the
public began to suspect that Blecha had deliberately slowed up the Lucona
investigation in the early 1980s. Blecha's denials of any wrongdoing
were unconvincing, and Vranitzky forced him to resign.
Gratz, who had been foreign minister at the time the forged documents
relating to the Lucona's cargo had arrived in Vienna, was
suspected of even greater complicity in the affair. As the committee did
its work, it appeared increasingly clear that Gratz had covered up
important details of the affair to protect Proksch. Gratz resigned his
position when, like Blecha, he had lost all support within the SPÖ. In
the face of a very bleak ethical situation, Vranitzky could at least
claim that he had acted relatively quickly to clean house.
Austria - The Parliamentary Election of 1990
The ÖVP and SPÖ approached the parliamentary election of 1990 with
trepidation. In 1989 the political landscape had been shaken by Haider's
FPÖ, which had racked up impressive gains in provincial elections in
Carinthia, Salzburg, and Tirol. Even though questions had been raised
about Haider's honesty, he continued to entice voters to leave the major
parties. The FPÖ scored a spectacular success in Carinthia, where it
displaced the ÖVP as the second largest party, and it caused the ÖVP
to lose its absolute majority in Salzburg.
In the October 1990 national election, the FPÖ again shocked the
political establishment by increasing its share of the vote from 9.7 to
16.6 percent. This gain came almost completely at the expense of the ÖVP,
whose share of the vote declined from 41.3 to 32.1 percent. The SPÖ's
share of the vote remained essentially the same, which surprised
everyone. The party, realizing that its strong suit was the popularity
of Vranitzky, employed a new electoral strategy that probably explains
its ability to avoid the ÖVP's fate. With Vranitzky as the top
candidate in all nine electoral districts, the SPÖ urged voters to cast
preference votes for Vranitzky, which could be done without selecting
the SPÖ box on the ballot (these votes would count toward the SPÖ's
total number of seats in the Nationalrat, however). A nonpartisan
committee was organized to carry out this campaign, and it succeeded in
attracting support from sources that otherwise might not have voted for
the SPÖ in the regular manner. Because of disagreements between the two
Green parties, they did not run on a united ticket as they had in 1986.
The Green Alternative/Greens in Parliament (Grüne Alternative/Grüne in
Parliament--GAL), formerly known as the Alternative List of Austria,
received 4.5 percent and increased its seats in the parliament from
eight to ten. The United Greens of Austria (Vereinigte Grüne Österreichs--VGÖ)
received only 1.9 percent and won no seats.
Given the antipathy that Vranitzky felt for Haider, there was no
chance of a revival of an SPÖ-FPÖ coalition. After a period of
negotiations, the SPÖ and ÖVP agreed to continue the grand coalition.
Because economic conditions were much improved in comparison with 1986,
the new coalition planned to focus on issues such as social welfare,
health care, science, and research. Attention would also be given to
reforming the country's electoral system and its chambers of commerce
and labor. Increasing numbers of Austrians regarded the former as
unrepresentative and resented the latter's requirement of compulsory
membership. The coalition partners decided to upgrade the position of
state secretary for women's affairs to full cabinet rank, and the new
Ministry for Women's Affairs was created to oversee these matters.
Austria - Events of 1991-93
The trend toward the dissolution of the two-party system was
confirmed by the outcomes in four provincial elections held in 1991. The
FPÖ increased its share of the vote in all four elections, and in
Styria and Upper Austria it tripled its vote to 15.4 and 17.7 percent,
respectively. In Vienna the FPÖ displaced the ÖVP as the second most
powerful party in the provincial legislature, a particularly
embarrassing result for the ÖVP. The ÖVP lost ground in all four
elections, while the SPÖ lost seats in three elections. With its
showing in Vienna, the FPÖ became the second strongest party in two of
Austria's nine provinces, having achieved the same status in Carinthia
in 1989, also displacing the ÖVP.
In June 1991, President Kurt Waldheim announced that he would not
seek reelection in 1992. ÖVP leaders were relieved that Waldheim had
decided to retire from politics because they feared the eruption of
another bitter controversy over his wartime record if he had chosen to
run. Waldheim became the first incumbent Austrian president not to seek
reelection. Initially, the ÖVP and SPÖ looked into the possibility of
nominating a joint candidate for the 1992 election. However, the two
parties were unable to agree on a candidate, and in November 1991 they
and the FPÖ each announced separate candidates. The ÖVP selected
Thomas Klestil, a career diplomat and former ambassador to the United
States. The SPÖ candidate was Rudolf Streicher, head of the Ministry
for National Industry and Transportation. The FPÖ candidate was Heide
Schmidt, who was also third president of the Nationalrat. The Green
candidate was the scientist Robert Jungk.
No candidate was able to win an absolute majority in the first
balloting on April 26, 1992. Streicher polled 41 percent, compared with
Klestil's 37 percent, but far ahead of Schmidt's 16 percent and Jungk's
6 percent. In the run-off elections four weeks later, when only the top
two candidates were on the ballots, Klestil scored an easy victory over
Streicher with 57 percent of the total vote. Controversy about his
opponent's war record, a series of scandals connected to the SPÖ, and
Klestil's skill in dealing with the media contributed to his easy
victory in the second round of voting. Perhaps most important, however,
was his career as a diplomat abroad that had kept him out of politics
(although he was an ÖVP member) and made him seem well suited for
leading the country into the post-Cold War era.
The collapse of the Soviet empire and the former Yugoslavia increased
the number of foreigners coming to Austria. The influx of asylum seekers
and illegal immigrants posed a challenge to Austrian authorities. In
1992 and 1993, new laws went into effect that sought to reduce the
number of those coming to the country for asylum and to more strictly
control the large foreign community already present in Austria. The laws
resulted both from serious practical problems of caring for foreigners
in need of food and fears of many Austrians that their country was in
danger of Überfremdung, that is, being submerged by
everincreasing waves of foreign immigrants. Some politicians, most
notably Haider, sought to profit politically from these fears.
In early 1993, a referendum sponsored by Haider was held to determine
popular support for further tightening the laws regulating foreigners.
More than 400,000 signatures were collected, half of what Haider had
sought but still a