Why America Needs A Political Audit
Americans need to ask if their current political system is delivering on the promise of their constitution
“…Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide” ~ John Adams, The Letters of John and Abigail Adams
Since the election of Donald Trump as president, rancorous political rhetoric and legislative gridlock have increased polarization in American politics to the detriment of important issues that need urgent attention. Critical legislation on immigration and healthcare has been held up in Congress. New filibustering rules mean that governing parties can steamroll their chosen picks for key agencies and constitutional posts through congressional majority.
American democracy is at a crossroads today — marked by increased acrimony, a staggering deterioration in levels of political debate, the rise of polarization both within and between parties, and the inability of institutions to address major policy issues.
The good news though is that fully 61% of Americans say “significant changes” are needed in the fundamental “design and structure” of the U.S. government to make it work in current times, per a year-long study conducted by the Pew Research Center.
America’s primary system is increasingly churning out candidates who espouse views often far, far away from the political center. It happened earlier with the Tea Party movement within the Republican Party, and now with the “Sandernistas” from among the ranks of the Democratic Party. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s victory in the Democratic primary for New York’s 14th congressional district is a case in point. Even as she carried more than 55% of the primary vote, many of her political positions (e.g. tuition-free universities, abolishing America’s immigration enforcement agency), are likely to turn off centrist voters at election time.
Due to gerrymandering, only a handful of congressional districts today are genuinely competitive. This has had a debilitating effect on larger electoral contests. Presidential elections are now being decided by outcomes in a handful of genuinely competitive districts.
Governing parties have every reason to gerrymander districts since states assign electors to the electoral college on a “winner-takes-all” basis, i.e. all the electors from a state are assigned based on whoever wins a particular state, rather than assigning them in proportion to candidates’ vote share.
The Case for Political Reform
As the Pew study notes, Americans are receptive to the idea of a root-and-branch review of their democracy.
Are the institutions and processes within American democracy genuinely reflective of the ever-increasing complexity of America’s polity? Do elections genuinely reflect the popular will? Do elections serve the purpose of leading to policy outcomes that serve the largest number of Americans, or do they only end up benefiting the winners’ core support base? Americans should consider these questions as they begin discussions on reform.
I offer some broad themes (and solutions) that could be signposts for a genuine debate:
1. Electoral system
In any democracy, party primaries churn out candidates away from the political center. During the actual election, the candidates are then expected to crawl towards the center in an effort to win over at least 50% of the vote in a two-party scenario. However, heavily gerrymandered districts mean that candidates often only make appeals to their respective bases as part of a “get-out-the-vote” strategy.
This can be mitigated by moving to a Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) system, used mostly recently by Maine. Per RCV, voters are expected to rank candidates in terms of choice. Candidates with the least numbers of first-choice votes are eliminated with their voters’ second-, third- and subsequent choice votes re-distributed amongst the other remaining candidates. The process continues till a winner emerges with the maximum number of overall votes.
RCV incentivizes candidates to make broad-based political appeals in order to pick up second- and third-choice votes from voters who are otherwise not part of their core support base.
If deployed at the primary and election stage, RCV will lessen the trend of polarizing party candidates, elevate political rhetoric somewhat, soften the ill effects of gerrymandering, and lessen the acrimony left in the wake of elections.
2. Electoral College
The majority of American states apportion electors to the electoral college on a winner-takes-all basis (i.e. electors allocated en bloc to the winning presidential candidate). Some have suggested doing away with the electoral college completely and relying solely on the popular vote during Presidential elections. This proposal militates against the federal spirit of the American constitution and so is unlikely to make major headway.
A more useful way would be for states to allocate their electors proportionally, that is, based on the share of the popular vote acquired by each candidate from that state. This would balance the federal impulse behind the electoral college with that of the popular vote.
Incidentally, the Pew study found 55% of Americans supportive of changing the way presidents are elected in favor of the popular vote.
3. Electoral District Boundaries and Supreme Court Appointments
America should follow the example of other countries and work towards depoliticizing its redistricting process and appointments’ procedures.
Creating an apolitical or bipartisan body to delineate electoral boundaries based on decennial census results could go a long way towards reducing gerrymandering. These could be similar to the UK’s boundary commissions.
Similarly, look at India’s collegium system when considering changes to the way Supreme Court judges are appointed. In the spirit of achieving a true separation of powers, can judges appoint themselves, subject to Congressional oversight?
Politics in a democracy is meant to provide avenues and platforms for decision-making amongst citizens as well as create a sturdy bridge between government and the governed. The state of America’s democracy today is such that it is creating a wedge between citizens and weakening their faith in democratic institutions.
This is further compounded by evidence that external actors are actively involved in subverting America’s democracy through covert means (Russia) or by presenting their own models as viable alternatives (China).
Americans need to engage in an honest, open discussion as to whether their democracy in its current form is able to deliver on the promises of their constitution. The themes suggested above would be good starting points.
