WI: May 1946 French Constitutional Referendum succeeds?

[Bomster]

In May of 1946, a Constitutional Referendum was presented to the French electorate, featuring reforms such as greatly expanding the power of the Assembly, abolishing the Senate, and more. The Yes side was backed by the Communists and SFIO, who failed to run a unified campaign. The No side was backed by pretty much everyone else, who feared that a unicameral legislature would create a “dictatorship” of the Assembly, which was dominated by Marxists. Despite the infighting on the Left, the referendum was defeated by a very narrow margin of only 52.82% for No and 47.18% for Yes. A swing of only about ~3% of the electorate is all it would take for the referendum to succeed. What if, for example, the SFIO set aside whatever reservations they had about the Communists and agreed to run a common campaign with them in support of the referendum? Could the referendum have succeeded? What if the referendum succeeded? Would it result in a more left-wing, maybe even communist or socialist France? How could this affect France itself, Europe, and the developing Cold War? How would individuals like Charles De Gaulle, the President, react? How long will this alternate Fourth Republic last?

 

[Dancing Fool]

maybe even communist or socialist France?

I hope not. Because hard, ideological socialism is sub-par, on both civil liberties and economic output.

Plus, in the post-WWII years, France already had “indicative planning.” This is basically the steel companies agreeing to produce X amount and the auto companies agree to buy the same X amount.

Now, why can’t a talented executive put together the same deal? Well, maybe you need the extra formality of these promises being made in writing in front of the Commerce Minister. Especially in a less lawsuit-prone system, perhaps?

 

[Discernible]

In May of 1946, a Constitutional Referendum was presented to the French electorate, featuring reforms such as greatly expanding the power of the Assembly, abolishing the Senate, and more. The Yes side was backed by the Communists and SFIO, who failed to run a unified campaign. The No side was backed by pretty much everyone else, who feared that a unicameral legislature would create a “dictatorship” of the Assembly, which was dominated by Marxists. Despite the infighting on the Left, the referendum was defeated by a very narrow margin of only 52.82% for No and 47.18% for Yes. A swing of only about ~3% of the electorate is all it would take for the referendum to succeed. What if, for example, the SFIO set aside whatever reservations they had about the Communists and agreed to run a common campaign with them in support of the referendum? Could the referendum have succeeded? What if the referendum succeeded? Would it result in a more left-wing, maybe even communist or socialist France? How could this affect France itself, Europe, and the developing Cold War? How would individuals like Charles De Gaulle, the President, react? How long will this alternate Fourth Republic last?

Suggested addition. Looking at the results why not have the margin of victory decided by Algerian and some other colonial vote with Metropolitan France being slightly against the proposal.

 

[David T]

I posted about this in 2018:

***

Albert Guerard's summary of the two constitutions of 1946:

"The constitution elaborated by the Assembly under the inspiration of two men of keen intelligence, Andre Philip and Pierre Cot, [Phillip was a Socialist, Cot was elected as a republican but was known by everyone to be close to the Communists--in fact, the Venona documents make it clear that he was a KGB agent--DT] was a bold departure from the Orleanist compromise of 1875. It reverted to the tradition of the old Radicals, so different from the trimmers and time-servers who had later adopted the name. The Senate was abolished outright. The President became an even more shadowy figure than under the Third Republic. The single and omnipotent Assembly elected and could remove the prime minister. It was a Jacobin constitution and paved the way for the autocracy of a majority party. It was passed by a coalition of the Communists and Socialists over the opposition of the M.R.P.'s. General de Gaulle, now a private citizen, pronounced against it. When on May 5, 1946, it was submitted to a referendum, it was rejected by 10,583,724 votes to 9,453,675.

"A new Constitutional Assembly was elected on June 2, 1946. There was no sensational change; but since the M.R.P. was now the largest party, Bidault became president-premier with Gouin, Socialist, and Thorez, Communist, as vice-premiers. The second constitution diverged widely from the first but not, as De Gaulle had expected, in the direction of the American system, with a strong and independent executive. It was purely and simply a rehash of the Constitution of 1875, with a figurehead president, a senate renamed Council of the Republic, elected in a very complicated fashion, and a popular chamber or national assembly. Both constitutions were prefaced with elaborate declarations of rights. Both made provisions for a French Union or Commonwealth to supersede the colonial empire.

"Again De Gaulle expressed his disapproval. On October 13, 1946, 9,120,576 Frenchmen endorsed the new regime, and 7,980,333 rejected it. But there were 25,379,917 registered voters: the nine million "yeas" represented only 36 per cent of the electorate. The constitution was evidently a compromise, unloved even by its sponsors. The M.R.P. in particular hastened to say that it was voted to end a provisional situation fraught with discomfort and dangers, but that it was in need of prompt and drastic amendment. So, with perverted logic, France progressed from the provisional to the precarious. It might have been wiser to do without a permanent constitution for a few years longer, or even, like the France of the Ancient Regime and like England to the present day, to dispense with a written constitution altogether..." https://archive.org/stream/franceamodernhis006433mbp#page/n475/mode/2up

The fear of some conservatives that the first constitution would lead to an eastern-European-style "people's democracy" in France seems overblown. True, as long as the Communist and Socialists had a majority in the National Assembly they could theoretically govern by themselves under this constitution. However, the Socialists (SFIO) rejected all attempts by the PCF to make them into a junior partner. They insisted that the government include the Christian Democratic MRP as well as Communists and Socialists. If this was true even in 1945-6 when the left-wing postwar tide was at its height, it would certainly be true after the Cold War intensified in 1947. Guy Mollet, the SFIO leader, famously said that the PCF was "not on the Left but in the East." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Section_of_the_Workers'_International I think the PCF will still be ejected from the government as it was in OTL. And in any event, the PCF-SFIO majority in the National Assembly would not last forever.

However, it wouldn't solve the Fourth Republic's problems, either. Having a Council of the Republic (as the Senate was renamed) did nothing to solve France's problems, but it didn't cause them, either. Nor did the Fourth Republic Presidents (Auriol and Coty). When the generals revolt, the Assembly will still call on De Gaulle to come to power and he will still write a new constitution..

 

[Mynock]

IIRC in the May constitution, governments did not have to resign automatically after losing a vote. Feels like that would he a big win for governmental stability. I still think it's a rocky road ahead but it can't be less stable than OTL's 4th republic, right?

 

[David T]

IIRC in the May constitution, governments did not have to resign automatically after losing a vote. Feels like that would he a big win for governmental stability. I still think it's a rocky road ahead but it can't be less stable than OTL's 4th republic, right?

Are you sure about that? Everyhthing I read indicates that the purpose of the May constitution was to *increase* the National Assembly's power over the government.

 

[Mynock]

Are you sure about that? Everyhthing I read indicates that the purpose of the May constitution was to *increase* the National Assembly's power over the government.

Couldn't tell you where I got it from, might have read it somewhere a few years ago.
I've skimmed the French wiki and can't find any mention of it, all it says is a majority of the chamber had to vote to overthrow a cabinet whereas OTL's 4th Republic required an absolute majority so I think you are right.

 

[Xavier]

Couldn't tell you where I got it from, might have read it somewhere a few years ago.
I've skimmed the French wiki and can't find any mention of it, all it says is a majority of the chamber had to vote to overthrow a cabinet whereas OTL's 4th Republic required an absolute majority so I think you are right.

Both a vote of confidence asked by the government as a motion of censure on the initiative of the Assemblée would have required an absolute majority of members. From the actual text of the proposed constitution (sole link on its French wiki):

Article 81.
La question de confiance ne peut être posée qu'après délibération du Conseil des ministres ; elle ne peut l'être que par le président du Conseil. Le vote sur la question de confiance ne peut intervenir qu'un jour franc après qu'elle a été posée devant l'Assemblée. Il a lieu au scrutin public.
La confiance ne peut être refusée au cabinet qu'à la majorité absolue des députés a l'Assemblée.
Ce refus entraîne la démission collective du cabinet.


Article 82.
Le vote par l'Assemblée nationale d'une motion de censure entraîne la démission collective du cabinet. Ce vote ne peut intervenir que deux jours francs après le dépôt de la motion. Il a lieu au scrutin public à la tribune.
La motion de censure ne peut être adoptée qu'à la majorité absolue des députés à l'Assemblée.

Those were also literally copy-pasted into the actual 46 constitution:

Article 49. - La question de confiance ne peut être posée qu'après délibération du Conseil des ministres ; elle ne peut l'être que par le président du Conseil.
Le vote sur la question de confiance ne peut intervenir qu'un jour franc après qu'elle a été posée devant l'Assemblée. Il a lieu au scrutin public.
La confiance ne peut être refusée au Cabinet qu'à la majorité absolue des députés à l'Assemblée.
Ce refus entraîne la démission collective du Cabinet.

Article 50. - Le vote par l'Assemblée nationale d'une motion de censure entraîne la démission collective du Cabinet.
Ce vote ne peut intervenir qu'un jour franc après le dépôt de la motion. Il a lieu au scrutin public.
La motion de censure ne peut être adoptée qu'à la majorité absolue des députés à l'Assemblée.

I also don't see anything in the actual 46 constitution requiring the government to resign upon losing a (normal) vote. Though in any parliamentary democracy, such a thing happening usually means that either a government coalition party lost control over its legislators or decided to vote against the government, which would usually lead to a motion of confidence/censure, but that is shared by all parliamentary democracies with coalitions, not specific to the IVe République.

 

[Galba Otho Vitelius]

Would the Assembly be elected by proportional representation? If so, the Communists and Socialists don't get a majority, so no leftist takeover, not that the army, the Americans, and the British would allow one.

I see the arguments above, but I really don't see any reason the Fourth Republic doesn't collapse on schedule even without an upper chamber.

 

[Mynock]

Would the Assembly be elected by proportional representation? If so, the Communists and Socialists don't get a majority, so no leftist takeover, not that the army, the Americans, and the British would allow one.

I see the arguments above, but I really don't see any reason the Fourth Republic doesn't collapse on schedule even without an upper chamber.

Well to be fair even if there was a socialist+communist majority the socialists didn't get along that well with the communists anyway. OTL 1945 saw a PCF+SFIO majority and the sky didn't fall. They ended up inviting the MRP in anyway.