Unique Nature of American Elections – Does Government Work?

American elections differ quiet dramatically from other democratic countries. There are five distinct features of American elections. One, the United States has a large number of elections that occur frequently. Frequent and numerous elections result in decreased turnout. People are unable or unwilling to go to the voting booth every time there is an election. This is because there are costs associated with voting. Cost include both direct and opportunity costs. Direct costs are in the form of a monetary sum that it costs people to vote. Opportunity costs are the forgone earning that the individual could have earned had they stayed at work as well as the time they are giving up to go vote. Low voter turnout represents the high costs associated with voting. However, Americans feel they have an obligation to vote and that it is their civic duty to do so. If Americans did not feel that way voter turnout would be even lower. A low turnout to elections is potentially detrimental to the democratic system. Elections are supposed to represent the interests of the American people, however, if only a small portion of people are voting than only a small portion of peoples interests are being represented. Two, elections are also separate and independent from one another. In the United States we individually elect representatives of congress, the president, state governors, local officials, etc. Separately electing officials ensures that one party is not dominating the American political system. If the system were to be dominated by one party it would further deter voters of the opposing party and make them believe their vote did not matter. Three, voter regulation rules are inconsistent across the country. The federal government does not regulate how states run their voting booths. States can have different registration rules, varying rules for absentee ballots or early ballots, what type of election devices can be used, and when and how recounts are conducted. This vast variation in how states regulate their voting systems creates inconsistency and reduces voter turnouts. People that move from one state to another may spend a certain amount of time unable to vote because they have not resided in the state long enough. In addition the regulations and rules may make it difficult for the average American to register to vote. Without federal consistency there are significancy differences across states that impacts voter turnout. Four, elected positions have fixed terms of office. Having fixed terms of office makes the American political system retroactive. Citizens are unable to actively change their elected officials they are only able to remove them after their term is up. This means that when an officials have the same term regardless of how the American people feel they are performing. Five, elections are held on a fixed date. I think having elections held on a fixed date is actually beneficial. Individuals know the dates and know they will be the same every year. Varying the date every year would cause people to lose track of when they are support to vote. The consistency of voting dates is beneficial to the American people as a whole. Overall I find out system to be flawed and only represent a small portion of Americans desires. I think better education would help to improve voter turnout and would make elections more representative of what the American people want.

Christopher Barry says:

November 2, 2017 at 10:55 pm

You present a valid and agreeable interpretation of the problems and their ramifications of participation with the American government, specifically through elections. I think that when we look at the problems of the American electoral system we need to look back and understand how and why the current system was created and still persists. By looking back, we can also gauge at how to figure out pragmatic, yet constitutional solutions to the problems or if in reality they are actually a problem.
When looking at the creation of the US Constitution, the Founders were trying to prevent what they viewed as the tyranny of the British imperial control as well as tyranny of the people (fixed terms to prevent the people from constantly changing the government). By giving control of elections (as well as other powers) to the states, the Founders were trying to prevent tyranny in a centralized power, keeping control of the government closer to the people. In addition, the Founders attempted to force representatives to stay close to and understanding of the people that they represent while keeping the people (those in the electorate at the time-white propertied men) and representatives constantly interested and involved in the political process. Elections were at the beginning supposed to only represent the elite, wealthy, and landowning (usually all the same).
Now, times and circumstances have obviously changed. The power and influence of the federal government has grown drastically. Most Americans perceive the federal government and its role as the most important and influential to their lives (even those arguable, state and local government has a more direct effect on the people). I would recommend that the federal government provide general guidelines for how elections should be conducted (specifically federal elections). In addition, I would suggest that education be furthered opened up (in terms of quality and material, specifically civic education and engagement). This would allow Americans to have a better understanding and knowledge of the system and how to work with it in order to ensure their voices are being represented and that necessary change occurs.