where 0 would be a perfectly proportional election outcome. Australia This table uses for example the 2012 Queensland state election, one of the largest landslides in Australian electoral history. Though Australia and New Zealand have somewhat similar political histories, Australia uses preferential voting in Single-member districts for Commonwealth House of Representative and most state and territory Legislative Assembly elections, which tends to result in far less proportionality compared to New Zealand's MMP system (or other proportional electoral systems), especially for larger minor parties, such as The Greens or, historically, the Australian Democrats. The 2012 Queensland election had an extremely high Gallagher Index, at 31.16, due to the massive landslide in seats for the victorious LNP. The LNP gained 88% of the seats with less than 50% of the vote. Most recent Australian state and federal elections however score between 10 and 12. EU The 7 political groups of the European Parliament instead of the 203 political parties allow a concise calculation of disproportionality between votes and seats. The Gallagher index for the European Parliament is 7.87. Sweden The disproportionality of the 2018 Swedish general election was 1.8 according to the Gallagher index, which is extremely low by international standards (resulting in almost perfectly proportional seat allocations), due to Sweden's use of the modified Sainte-Laguë method in elections to the Riksdag. Republic of Ireland The disproportionality of the 2020 Irish general election was 1.96 according to the Gallagher index. The Republic of Ireland uses the single transferable vote (STV) system with Droop quota in elections to the Dáil Éireann. United States This table uses the aggregate results of the 2016 elections to the United States House of Representatives. These 435 single-seat elections are winner-take-all, which would tend to create disproportionate results, but this is moderated by the extremely high share of votes obtained by the two major parties—more than 97%, likely in part caused by fears of wasted votes and vote splitting. The Gallagher index ignores the effect of the primaries on the proportionality. Countries The Gallagher indices for individual countries are listed below, only the last available index is shown. See also Democracy index V-Dem Democracy indices List of democracy indices Notes References External links Gallagher Index Made Easy The Gallagher Index: A Measure of Disproportionality Various Gallagher Indexes at Wikimedia Commons Website: Measuring Unfairness — Calculating Canada's Gallagher Index (This website includes the Gallagher Index in adjustable table format.