Lower House Electoral System: Change Stance that Assumes Reducing Number of Seats Is a Given

Editorial

17:49 JST, April 18, 2026

It must be said that Diet members are making light of their role of consolidating the diverse views of the people and reflecting those views in national politics in their intense pursuit of “self-sacrificing reforms,” which is a catchy slogan.

The ruling and opposition parties must contemplate the nature of the legislature and engage in discussions regarding electoral reform for the House of Representatives. Priority should not be given to reducing the number of lower house seats.

A council of the ruling and opposition parties regarding the lower house electoral system has resumed discussions, which were suspended after the chamber was dissolved in January.

At a council meeting, the Liberal Democratic Party indicated its intention to submit a bill to the current Diet session to cut the number of seats in the lower house, which currently has 465 seats, by 10%. The Japan Innovation Party, the LDP’s coalition partner, called for 45 seats to be cut. Both parties are considering a proposal to reduce the number of seats by 45 only in the proportional representation segment, but this was not mentioned at the council meeting.

Meanwhile, other parties, such as the Centrist Reform Alliance and the Democratic Party for the People, called for seat cuts to be considered as part of broader electoral system reforms.

In the first place, the council was set up in January last year to explore ways to secure a sufficient number of lawmakers elected from regional areas, while seeking to rectify disparities in the value of votes. Proposals for introducing a system centering on proportional representation or a multiple-seat constituency system were put forward by some parties, but discussions have not progressed.

The issue of lower house seat cuts has abruptly emerged as an item on the agenda since the JIP strongly advocated for it, including it in a coalition agreement with the LDP.

However, there are fewer lawmakers in Japan compared to other major countries. If lower house seats are reduced arbitrarily, it will become harder for the voices of the people to reach national politics. Advocating for reducing the number of seats is tantamount to denying the lawmakers’ role as representatives of the people.

The number of seats in the lower house, which stood at 500 in 2000, has been cut to 465. Currently, many Diet members serve on multiple committees. If the number of seats are reduced even more, it could further increase the burden on lawmakers, raising concerns that they will be unable to sufficiently scrutinize budget proposals and bills.

The bill submitted by the LDP-JIP ruling coalition late last year called for slashing the number of lower house seats in single-seat constituencies by 25 and that in the proportional representation segment by 20. After the bill was scrapped with the dissolution of the lower house, the ruling bloc changed the proposal, now seeking to cut 45 seats in only the proportional representation segment.

Reducing seats in single-seat constituencies would be disadvantageous for the LDP, which won more than 80% of seats in these constituencies in the latest lower house election. This appears to be the reasoning behind the proposal change.

Under the current system in which the electoral zoning is regularly reviewed in proportion to population, the number of lawmakers elected from regional areas has continued to decline as people are moving to urban areas. Instead of spending time discussing cutting the number of lower house seats, the electoral system itself needs to be reviewed urgently.

If Diet members truly want to implement “self-sacrificing reforms,” it is reasonable to consider matters such as cutting the ¥1 million monthly allowance allocated to each lawmaker for research, public relations and travel expenses — funds that have long been criticized for the lack of transparency of their use.

 (From The Yomiuri Shimbun, April 18, 2026)