For almost 30 years, since HaRav Shach guided Degel HaTorah to rejoin Agudas Yisroel after then ran separately in the elections of 1988 (5749), whatever representation the combined United Torah Judaism party earned in the elections was split: 60% for Agudas Yisroel and 40% for Degel HaTorah. This has been true at the national (Knesset) level and also at the municipal level in Jerusalem.
Even when the deal was first made, many people in Degel HaTorah thought it was not fair and did not reflect the true proportions of the two factions, but it was continued -- up until the recent elections in Jerusalem when the two ran as separate parties. The results showed that Degel HaTorah had been correct and in fact the more-or-less correct division should have been the opposite: 60% for Degel HaTorah and 40% for Agudas Yisroel.
HaRav Avrohom Weber, member of the Electoral Committee on behalf of Degel HaTorah, has been very connected to the statistics and calculations of the elections vis-a-vis the voters for many years. We met him the first time on Wednesday evening in the basement of Building 3 in the Jerusalem municipality two flights down in a large auditorium where the votes of the soldiers and handicapped were being counted. The results of this count were supposed to sum up the number of voters who voted in the last elections of the Jerusalem mayoralty and the breakdown into the different parties.
Supervisor of the elections there clarified that every complicated question regarding the election rules and questions from the computations and determination of policy which find their way to him as being the one in charge, are referred to HaRav Weber to hear his deciding opinion. He notes that his rich experience is proven indisputably to be the final correct decision. This is upheld by the figures resulting at the end of this fateful and decisive election campaign.
"The first obligation is to determine what we all see very tangibly - that the Lithuanian-yeshivish sector complied with the directions of the Torah leadership and turned up en masse, in spite of the fact that this was not the full showing of its voters. This proves very clearly how deeply is embedded in them the emunas chachomim of Torah scholars.
"Something interesting happened, that in the late hours of the night, when the results of the vote came to me, I was able to note the discrepancy between the numbers of voters which were transmitted to us from the polls and the apportionment of the mandates. This came to light from the votes for Degel HaTorah which represented 41,540 votes, while the mathematic calculation we made according to a table of polls showed 41,711 votes. This is why I refused to sign the protocol, despite the fatigue of the workers, before the matter was investigated.
"An obvious message showed that if we take Jerusalem as a representative example to examine the percentage of our votes in relationship to the sum of the Degel HaTorah party, it is difficult to absolutely determine and quantify at this point the full number of votes made for Degel HaTorah in the country as a whole, since there are many parties which identify with Degel HaTorah but do not necessarily cast votes for them. There are many places where they joined with other parties.
"But if we take Jerusalem as an example, whoever is familiar with the recognized facts knows that the Jerusalem population represents 26% of the total number of Torah-true votes for the Knesset. If Degel HaTorah received here about 42,000 votes, multiplied by four, this is approximately the relationship of the total citizens of the country. This figure shows a clear result of over 160,000 votes, or more than four mandates (Knesset members), one percent more than the cutoff point of Knesset representation in effect today. Thus, one can clearly state that if someone is afraid that we will not make it above the cutoff point in the coming national elections, this does not reflect upon Degel HaTorah, which stands solidly above that figure on its own."
"In a simple calculation of the total sum of votes in Jerusalem within the components of United Torah Jewry - 67,656 - where Agudath Israel received 26,116 votes and Degel HaTorah 41,540 votes, it turns out that the Degel HaTorah received 62%. This shows that all of the agreements of 60%-40% determined in the past were accurate, but in reverse order."
You say that in every place where Degel HaTorah stood alone, it was clearly proven numerically that we are the largest [chareidi] representation?
"Take for example the Har Nof neighborhood, considered a relatively modern one which has a large percent of immigrant residents but in reality, the facts representing the voting there indicate a vote for the veteran parties per the directives of Torah leaders. Degel HaTorah headed the list with a decisive advantage of 4,861 votes, followed by Shas with 2,163, Agudath Israel with 1,001 votes and Hitorrerut a mere 172 votes.
