Paths to Spitzenkandidaten

The purpose of this chapter is threefold. First, it seeks to map out the ways in which the Spitzenkandidaten were chosen in 2014 and 2019. Second, it seeks to discuss any changes or broader trends that have emerged across these two ‘moments’ in the early phase of the institutionalisation of the ‘Spitzenkandidaten process’. In particular, it considers (a) whether there is a dominant model for candidate selection in these, early, stages of the evolution of the Spitzenkandidaten process, and (b) the extent to which intra-party procedures differ along ideological lines. Finally, it situates the current state of play in relation to how the Spitzenkandidaten are chosen in the broader debate on the evolving EU political system and, in particular, (a) the theory of parliamentary federation and (b) models of EU democracy. Four arguments are advanced in this chapter. First, there are several commonalities between the ‘paths’ taken by the party families when choosing their candidates—to such an extent that one may well speak of a dominant model. Second, presenting the institutionalisation of the Spitzenkandidaten process as a battle or conflict between the European Council and the European Parliament is misleading since members of the former are active and influential players—in their capacity of party leaders—in the selection of Spitzenkandidaten in the first place. Third, the key features of this ‘model’ point in the direction of a practical rejection of the lessons offered by the theory of parliamentary federation. Finally, the party families that use the dominant model appear to be giving—at that level—a practical response to the question of the future of the European Union by opting for procedures that are akin to the model of EU democracy that Ben Crum defines as political union.