Germania

Federal State Election Baden-Wuerttemberg 2026

Bündnis-C

Bündnis90/Grüne

Die Gerechtigkeitspartei

Die Linke

Freie Wähler

Klimaliste BW

ÖDP

Tierschutzpartei

Verjüngungsforschung

Volt

More public shelters mean that the state builds new or existing bunkers to protect the population in the event of attacks or disasters.

Proponents want more protection because there are only 579 public shelters in Germany with around 480,000 places for 84 million people, and most of these are not ready for use. They propose repurposing tunnels, underground car parks or house shelters to save lives.

Critics see high costs as a problem, around £115 billion for nationwide additions or billions for reactivation. They consider bunkers to be ineffective against modern precision weapons with short warning times and instead call for warning systems or private shelters.

For many families, sending their children to a daycare centre, or Kita for short, involves high fees that are likely to rise in the future. Because these fees are set by local authorities, they vary greatly from region to region. A nationwide uniform regulation that provides financial relief for families is therefore in favour of free daycare centres. In the interests of equal opportunities, this also ensures that children are no longer sent to daycare centres later, for shorter periods or not at all for financial reasons. However, the high public costs argue against this. Critics fear that larger childcare groups could compromise quality if there is a shortage of qualified staff. It is also argued that targeted relief for low-income families could be more sensible than universal free childcare for all.

A compulsory final year in nursery school would mean that all children would have to attend a nursery school in the year before starting school. Proponents see this as an opportunity to improve language skills, integration and social skills. This is particularly true for children from disadvantaged families or with a migrant background. Critics see it as a violation of parental rights. They also warn of more bureaucracy and shortages of nursery places, arguing that one year is not enough for the necessary support.

As the highest school leaving certificate in Germany, the Abitur has not yet been standardised nationwide. The curricula, examination requirements and assessment criteria vary considerably between the federal states. A proposal for a standardised Abitur throughout Germany is therefore under discussion. Proponents argue that identical examinations for all would create greater comparability and fairness. A standardised Abitur would also make it easier for families to move between federal states and enable universities to better assess the performance of applicants. Opponents, however, point to federalism as a central principle of the German education system and as a historical lesson that opposes centralism. The federal states would be less able to respond to regional characteristics, and innovative educational concepts would be more difficult to implement. It is also argued that a standardised Abitur could lead to a compromise at too low a level of performance.

As part of the federal constitution, religious education aims to strengthen engagement with one's own faith, impart knowledge about different faiths and thus promote religious education and personal values. Proponents of religious education see it as an important basis for intercultural coexistence and understanding. Proposals to replace religious education in the state constitution with ethics classes, on the other hand, aim to create a common subject that is ideologically neutral, taught without reference to any particular religion, and compulsory for all pupils. They see this as a better way to promote tolerance and critical thinking and want to work towards a stricter separation of church and state.

At many schools, the German Armed Forces provide information about their tasks, training opportunities and career prospects. In view of the current international threat situation, some see this as an opportunity to attract more young people to the German Armed Forces. Youth officers can thus spark interest in technical or social professions while giving students realistic insights into military service. Critics, however, see these events as dangerous advertising for military service, which militarises young and easily influenced people at an early age. Another counterargument is that schools, as neutral places of learning, should remain free of advertising influences – including those of the armed forces.

Currently, the use of private mobile phones in schools is not strictly prohibited and is regulated individually by each school. Many of them already prohibit their use. The argument is that mobile phones can distract from lessons, disrupt concentration and the learning atmosphere, and encourage bullying. In addition, a ban strengthens personal social contacts and direct exchange among students because it prevents them from retreating into their own mobile phones. Opponents, on the other hand, see smartphones as valuable tools for communication and learning. As places of education, they argue that schools should promote the responsible use of digital media or at least be able to make their own decisions about whether and when mobile phones are allowed.

Proponents view flying the German national colours at all schools as an important symbolic gesture that will strengthen national unity and identity as well as social cohesion. Others are more concerned about the dangers of nationalism. Mandating that the flag be flown could marginalise students from different cultural backgrounds or with different political views.

The question of whether people without EU citizenship should be allowed to vote in local elections in Germany touches on fundamental issues of democracy, participation and integration. Proponents argue that many people without an EU passport live, work and pay taxes in Germany on a long-term basis. They should therefore have a say in who makes decisions in their community that directly affect their everyday lives. Participation in local elections could strengthen their sense of belonging and promote integration. Critics, on the other hand, see the right to vote as closely linked to citizenship. As a special privilege of citizens, it is linked to duties and rights at federal and state level and should therefore not be automatically transferred to foreigners. Many of these critics believe that without citizenship, the attachment to democratic values and institutions is not the same.

Lowering the barriers to referendums would mean that fewer signatures or lower quorums would be required for referendums. This is intended to make it easier for citizens to access direct democracy.

Proponents see this as leading to greater citizen participation and greater legitimacy for decisions, for example on infrastructure or constitutional issues. They argue that lower barriers reduce political apathy.

Critics warn of more bureaucracy, abuse by populists and insufficient discussion of complex issues. They also cite legitimacy, as high barriers ensure that enough people participate, thus protecting against decisions based on sentiment rather than a broad majority.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

The dual broadcasting system in Germany is something special. The idea is that, in addition to private providers, there are also public TV and radio stations. These are financed directly by broadcasting fees paid by every household – without any involvement from the state. This is to ensure that there is a media offering that is independent of advertising or other revenues and can thus produce diverse and high-quality content that contributes to the formation of opinion and democracy. The licence fees thus guarantee offerings for all population groups, including those that are less commercially interesting. 

The broadcasting licence fees in Baden-Württemberg are used to finance Südwestrundfunk SWR, with its many channels and online services. Critics see the broadcasting licence fees as too great a financial burden and question the necessity of public broadcasting, which some people do not use, in times of diverse private and digital media offerings. The cost structure is also criticised. Some accuse the broadcasters of lacking political independence despite their independence from the state, as various political parties and interest groups are represented on the supervisory boards of the broadcasting companies, which are supposed to ensure programme quality and balance.

A ban on the construction of new wind turbines would mean that no new turbines could be built.

Some argue that there are already too many turbines and that they generate surplus electricity. They point to environmental damage such as bird and bat deaths, changes to the landscape, noise and a decline in property values. Furthermore, the expansion of wind power competes with agriculture, nature conservation and tourism.

Others say that wind power provides emission-free electricity, covers around 24 per cent of demand and is becoming more efficient. A halt would cause electricity prices to rise, increase imports and jeopardise climate targets.

An obligation would mean that companies would have to install solar panels on the roofs of every new industrial building.

Proponents see this as a way to rapidly expand renewable energies. Large flat roofs on industrial buildings are ideal for solar power. This reduces CO₂ emissions and lowers energy costs in the long term through self-consumption.

Critics warn of high initial investments and technical hurdles. Not every roof is load-bearing or free of shade. This leads to more bureaucracy and delays in construction.

Investing a large portion of the special fund in rural areas would mean that a significant proportion of the €500 billion would primarily flow into rural projects. For example, for road construction, digital expansion or flood protection. Some want this in order to renovate worn-out infrastructure in rural areas, where more than half of the population lives. Others warn that such a focus neglects the needs of urban centres, where the investment backlog in transport and energy is greatest.

The wealth tax, which generally taxes a taxpayer's total assets, has been suspended in Germany since 1997. Arguments in favour of reintroducing such a tax include the ever-widening social divide and the fact that a wealth tax would enable high net worth individuals to contribute more to the financing of the community. Additional revenue could be invested in education, infrastructure or climate protection, as the tax is a state tax. Arguments against it include the fact that the valuation of assets represents a major hurdle with considerable administrative effort and that wealthy individuals could transfer their assets abroad. In addition, large assets do not necessarily equate to large incomes, meaning that homeowners or people with company shares, for example, would have difficulty paying the taxes. Critics also warn of lower investment in Germany as a business location.

Inheritance tax is levied on the transfer of assets after death. It applies to assets that are transferred to heirs. Proponents of an increase say that large fortunes should contribute more to the common good. The tax is intended to strengthen the public budget and reduce social inequality. Opponents warn of the consequences. A higher inheritance tax could place a financial burden on heirs of businesses or real estate, as not all estates consist of money. In the case of business acquisitions in particular, this could slow down investment and jeopardise jobs. In addition, there are warnings of increased bureaucracy due to the valuation process. Critics also see the risk of capital flight.

An obligation would mean that gynaecologists in training would have to perform abortions.

Proponents want to ensure better care, as many clinics do not offer abortions and there is a shortage of doctors who are skilled in performing the procedure. They are calling for practical training in surgical and medical methods for emergencies and quality.

Critics see this as a violation of freedom of conscience, as no one should be forced to participate in abortions. They fear a professional ban for doctors who object on ethical grounds and more bureaucracy in training.

The abolition of tuition fees for second degrees would mean that in some federal states, there would no longer be any extra fees of 500 to 650 euros per semester. Proponents see this as promoting greater equality of opportunity, as financial barriers are removed and people can more easily reorient themselves or gain new qualifications. Critics fear a higher burden on universities and believe that second degree students should contribute more.

Underutilised degree programmes are those with few enrolled students. Existing capacities are not fully utilised. This applies to teaching staff and infrastructure. These are often small or specialised subjects. Proponents of consolidation say that resources can be better pooled in this way. This is intended to increase the efficiency of teaching and research. Fewer degree programmes could be better equipped. Laboratories and teaching staff would be used more economically. Critics warn of the consequences. A merger could reduce the diversity of the higher education landscape. Creative and innovative degree programmes could be eliminated. This would limit the choices available to students.

The establishment of a tenth state university in Heilbronn would mean setting up a new state-run higher education institution. It would have its own structure, its own research priorities and its own range of courses. Proponents say that such a university would strengthen Heilbronn as a centre of science and business. It could expand the range of educational opportunities in northern Baden-Württemberg. A new state university could work closely with regional companies. This would promote innovation and knowledge transfer. Critics warn against fragmenting the higher education landscape. Instead of creating new structures, they argue, existing universities should be expanded. Better networking is also called for. Critics also warn of high costs. The establishment of a new university would tie up a lot of money. This money could then be lacking elsewhere, for example in teaching, research or infrastructure.

Palantir is a US software programme for analysing large amounts of data, which helps to identify patterns. One argument in favour of the police using Palantir is that it allows suspects and connections to be identified more quickly and complex cases, such as those involving terrorism or organised crime, to be dealt with more efficiently. Critics, however, warn of serious infringements on data protection, possible misinterpretation of data and heavy dependence on a private US company. They fear that this could restrict citizens' right to informational self-determination and the transparency of government actions.

Expanding video surveillance in crime hotspots would mean installing more cameras in areas with high crime rates. The aim is to deter offenders, solve crimes and increase the sense of security. Cameras would make it easier to identify offenders. Critics see this as an invasion of personal rights and data protection, as all individuals are recorded and there is no evidence of an overall reduction in crime. In addition, crime may be displaced to areas that are not monitored.

Preventive detention means that individuals can be taken into custody for a certain period of time even before they actually commit a violent crime if they are believed to be capable of committing a serious offence in the near future. Proponents argue that this allows dangerous situations to be defused at an early stage and potential victims to be better protected. Critics, however, warn that this violates the principle of presumption of innocence and that people are being imprisoned on the basis of predictions and assessments of their potential dangerousness. They see the danger that fundamental rights could be restricted and that wrong decisions could be made with serious consequences for those affected.

Training and recruiting additional police officers means that more young people will be attracted to the police service. These officers will work permanently in patrol and investigation duties. Proponents say this will strengthen the police presence on the ground. Response times could be reduced. The growing number of tasks could also be better managed. Critics point out that more personnel will result in high running costs. They see other approaches, including better equipment and less bureaucracy. Critics also warn against false expectations. Without clear priorities and reforms, additional positions will not automatically lead to greater efficiency and security.

The Bundesrat can initiate proceedings to ban the AfD if a federal state such as Baden-Württemberg votes in favour of it. The Bundesrat represents the state governments. The Federal Constitutional Court then decides on a ban.

Supporters see the AfD as clearly right-wing extremist and anti-constitutional. They want to protect the free democratic basic order. Petitions are calling on the Baden-Württemberg government to submit a motion to the Bundesrat.

Critics warn of high hurdles, as in the failed NPD proceedings. Failure could strengthen the AfD's image. It is also said that banning a popular party restricts the will of the voters and contradicts the principles of democracy.

Limiting the wolf population would mean deliberately regulating the number of wolves. This could also include making it easier to shoot wolves. Proponents hope that this will provide better protection for grazing animals. They expect greater planning security for farmers who need to protect their herds from attacks. Critics warn of the consequences. Wolves are strictly protected animals. Too severe a limitation could weaken species protection. In the long term, the wolf could be driven out of the landscape again. Critics therefore emphasise other measures. Effective herd protection and compensation for animals killed are more important than a general reduction in the number of wolves.

Benefits in kind for asylum seekers mean that they receive specific services instead of money. These include accommodation, food, clothing and other everyday necessities. Proponents hope that this will reduce the financial incentives for migration. It is also intended to prevent support payments from being transferred to countries of origin. Critics consider benefits in kind to be problematic. They see them as a form of discrimination. Benefits in kind are also considered to be administratively costly. Critics also emphasise the costs. Benefits in kind are often more expensive than cash benefits. They are also less effective at meeting individual needs.

The federal government is currently supporting voluntary returns to Syria. There are programmes in place to organise travel and provide one-off start-up assistance. Proponents emphasise the voluntary nature of these offers. The decision lies with the individuals concerned. Financial support can make a new start easier. It helps with travel costs and initial supplies on the ground. Critics warn of risks. They point to the continuing difficult humanitarian situation in Syria. Financial incentives could push people to return to unsafe conditions. There is also political criticism. Such programmes could be used as a signal of harsh migration policy. Long-term protection and integration could take a back seat.

A subsidy programme for small pubs in rural areas would mean that the state would provide targeted financial support to these businesses, for example for investments or modernisation.

Proponents point out that village pubs are often central meeting places and, as such, contribute greatly to quality of life and social cohesion. Studies on village meeting places cite pubs as important places of communication that strengthen village life and local identity. In addition, the decline of pubs has increased significantly in many regions.

Critics are sceptical about subsidies for individual industries because public funds are limited and targeted subsidies can distort competition with non-subsidised businesses.
They also argue that state aid should not permanently support uneconomical business models. Furthermore, it is pointed out that social meeting places in villages can also be created by other institutions such as clubs or village community centres, and that support programmes could therefore be aimed more broadly at meeting places as a whole.

Eine finanzielle Unterstützung von Initiativen zur Reduzierung des Fleischkonsums würde bedeuten, dass der Staat Kampagnen, Informationsarbeit oder pflanzliche Alternativen mit Geldern fördert. Befürworter sehen Vorteile für Klima, Gesundheit und Tierwohl. Kritiker befürchten damit zu große Markteingriffe und Belastung für Landwirte.

There is currently no statutory minimum wage in workshops for disabled people. Employees receive an average of 220 to 260 euros per month in addition to basic social security benefits.

Some are therefore calling for a minimum wage to ensure fair pay for work done. They see this as a sign of appreciation and independence from social welfare, as many work six to eight hours a day. On the other hand, the minimum wage could lead to greater pressure and job losses, as workshops have to operate economically.

Government subsidies are financial support provided by the state. They are aimed at companies, industries or specific groups. Examples include grants, tax breaks and low-interest loans. Proponents of subsidy cuts say this would reduce high government spending. Public funds could be used in a more targeted manner. A reduction in government debt is also mentioned. Critics warn of the consequences. Without subsidies, strategically important areas could be weakened. These include climate protection, for example. In addition, economically weaker regions or households could be placed under greater strain.

Promoting the establishment of the arms industry in Baden-Württemberg would mean that the state would support companies with land, infrastructure and cooperation agreements in order to attract more production of weapons and defence technology. Proponents see this as an opportunity for growth, new jobs and technological leadership. Critics warn of increased militarisation, ethical problems and low economic impact, as the arms industry cannot replace the state's important automotive industry.

Compulsory membership of chambers and associations means that companies automatically become members and have to pay contributions, for example to the Chamber of Industry and Commerce. Abolishing this requirement would remove this obligation and make membership voluntary.

Proponents see this as giving entrepreneurs more freedom. They criticise high contributions that offer no benefits, especially for small businesses. They view the chambers as bureaucratic and sluggish. They believe that interests can be better represented on a voluntary basis and that the chambers would then have to show more commitment.

Opponents warn that this would weaken the representation of all companies. Without compulsory membership, large companies could dominate and small ones could be disadvantaged. Chambers perform public tasks such as providing advice and representing interests, which would otherwise be lacking or become more expensive.

The rent cap limits increases when a property is re-let. It applies in tight housing markets. The aim is to prevent sharp rises in rent. If the rent cap is abolished, landlords would be freer to set rents for new contracts. Proponents of abolition say that the rent cap inhibits investment. This affects new construction and renovation. This would exacerbate the housing shortage rather than solve it. Critics warn of the consequences. Without rent control, many households would face greater financial burdens. In cities, displacement from residential areas could increase.

A reporting requirement for vacant rental properties would mean that owners would have to report vacant flats to the authorities after a certain period of time. Proponents hope that this will provide more insight into hidden vacancies and thus better opportunities for cities to find additional housing. Critics see this as more bureaucracy and additional obligations for landlords. They also fear that even objectively justified vacancies – for example, during renovations or tenant changes – will come under blanket suspicion and that property rights will be overly restricted.

Supporta questo progetto