The aim of the paper is to show the changes of statistical properties of the General
Election 1999 and 2004 as the voting system changes. We will concern with the
legislative election since the direct voting for executive power (presidency) occurs for the
first time in 2004, thus we do not have yet any reference to be compared with. In short,
the paper will try to answer the question how the socio-political changes as reflected by
the statistical properties of the election result happens on the changes of election rule.
As we know from previous works (Situngkir, 2003), political system as we perceived is
came out as emergent phenomena from the interacting citizens. Thus, the election result
analyzed by using statistics is the facts comes out from interacting political agents vote
for aggregate new political system. This is the main idea of social complexity: to look for
the pattern of the emergent phenomena from interacting agents. Eventually, we find that
the distributional pattern follows the power-law distribution that indicates the character
of self-organized in critical condition as the threshold to the chaotic regime (Schuster,
1995:70-72).
We use election result data that accessible from the web-site of General Election
Comission (Komisi Pemilihan Umum, 2004). We choose several regional (based on
provice) election result, i.e.: Province of Aceh, Province of Sumatera Utara, Province of
Sumatera Barat, Province of Sumatera Selatan, Province of Lampung, Province of Jambi,
Province of Bengkulu, Province of Riau, Province of Jakarta, Province of Yogyakarta,
Province of Nusa Tenggara Barat and Timur as sample of the whole nation-wide election
districts. In the other hand, we use the result of the election for DPD (Regional
Representative Council) of 2004 election result that taken from all of the election
districts. We normalized the votes of each parties and candidates concerning the majority
votes of each region and group all of the result of each district in the double-logarithmic
plot to see the distribution of votes. We note that we are not dealing with who the
winner of the election and the structural political pattern emerges from it, since it will be
analyzed in other research paper. What we concern mostly about in the paper is the
social analysis as reflected from the data.
2. Statistical Model
Let us assume that each candidate has normal distribution of their ability to persuade
voters to choose her, denoted by probability c; while p(c) is the probability density of
persuasion ability equals to c.
We can write,
( (c - μ )2
, , 1 —∏ΓV~
p(c) = -j^e 2σ (1)
∏∏σσ
where μ and σ are mean and standard deviation respectively of the distribution of c.
Next, we can say that fi (c) as pre-election campaign i-th process, while then
f1(c)=c1 (2)
f2(c)=c2f1(c)=c1c2 (3)