Demolicracy
I don’t understand why America is so interested in promoting “democracy” in foreign countries, especially those on the other side of the globe, when our form of democracy is so incredibly ineffective and stagnant.
Just hear me out here.
Nobody votes in this country. And it isn’t because they don’t care … it’s because our system absolutely sucks. Moreover, I believe that its current design intentionally cripples the American people, stripping them of their voice and power in our government and society.
First thing’s first. We have no real way of tracking who is who. Some people have social security cards, some have driver’s licenses, some have birth certificates. But the only way to “ensure” that each person gets one vote is to force them to “register” then come and sign a paper. Can someone remind me why we don’t have a Citizen Identification of some sort? Even China gets this right.
Then there’s registration … it is absolutely unnecessary. Registration is an extra hurdle thrown into our democratic process to purposefully make it more difficult for real people to vote. It is very hard to find information about how to register … and if you screw up and don’t do it on time, you lose your right. So why, in the world’s most advanced nation, do we have to rely on the initiative of millions of individual people to jump through this unneeded hurdle? I don’t get it … if you’re a citizen in the right age group, you should by definition be qualified.
Next comes the voting itself … it’s designed to be as difficult as possible. They schedule it during a non-holiday weekday … and not a Friday or Monday either, but a Tuesday (because in 1845, when the day was established, people didn’t want to miss church for their overnight buggy trip to the county seat). They then force people to “vote” during business hours then tell you that you have to go to some remote and usually difficult-to-find location (like a church or elementary school). The only people that actually get there, every time, are those who were predictable … the retired ones and such. And don’t even try to tell me that nobody has thought that this scheduling isn’t convenient … it’s clearly a way to control and predict how many votes will come in from each “district” (and don’t even get me started on how those “districts” are drawn by our politicians).
But assuming that Joe Citizen does successfully make it to his polling station at the right time … what will he find? Well, that’s easy … he’ll find a system in place that is ridiculously antiquated. Old ladies handing out cards? Punching holes in paper? Is there a big IBM mainframe in a gym somewhere that can input these timecards and do complex addition problems with them or something? Give me a break … this is the 21st century. We’re pouring trillions into blowing people up but can’t come up with a way to record votes?
Finally, of course, is the fact that our votes don’t actually count. You do know, my friend, that we don’t really live in a democracy … we live in a representative democracy. We don’t elect a president … we take a fancy poll. Then, later, a guy called an “elector” goes into a room and does the actual voting … and in reality, he can choose whomever he wants to choose. That man, who I have never met nor chosen to represent me, is the one who votes for the next president. It’s not like the olden days, when we needed guys like this to ride their horses from our hometowns to the capitol of the country to deliver our votes because we had to stay home and take care of the farm … so why do we have it?
Now I’m no political scientist. And I don’t know that I have the answer … though I think that a Citizen’s ID, online voting, and the demolition of unnecessary representation are obvious components of the solution. I do know, however, that the reason why it isn’t changing is quite simple: Control.
Making voting more smooth, easy, and equal would only make the results more unpredictable. It would encourage those who aren’t involved to get involved, it would eliminate trillions of dollars in waste and bureaucratic spider-webs, and it would give a voice to millions of people who are currently so [conveniently] quiet.
Here’s what I say … if we’re not going to change the way things work, we should re-institute the Pony Express. At least that was one antiquated and irrelevant system that was really sweet.
September 23rd, 2007 at 10:26 pm EST
I dont vote because I dont really care. I dont follow it all enough to make an educated vote. But I must say if there was no registration, I may do it.
September 23rd, 2007 at 10:40 pm EST
If voting were moved online how would all those old people who don’t know how to turn on a computer vote?
September 23rd, 2007 at 10:48 pm EST
They’d go to a government office or community center or library or polling station or grandkid’s home and vote. Maybe communities could even set up simplified touch-based online kiosks.
In other words, if you want to make an argument about equal access, then you must first admit that an online solution is, by nature, much more accessible than our current system. Your [very valid] question, HP, comes later … and there are any number of plausible ways to deal with it.
September 24th, 2007 at 2:37 am EST
Because it’s better than dictatorships where the dictator murders it’s citizens at his whim.
Not sure who you’ve been reading, but this is a VERY pessimistic way of looking at America.
For me, after 7 years of living in a one party, communist system - I love the American system more than ever (flaws and all). With all of it’s faults, at least none of my friends have been murdered by the local officials because of their faith in Jesus Christ!
Freedom is so valuable to me, I’m willing to jump through the ‘hoops of democracy’ to vote. Maybe I’m silly or naive, but I still believe my vote counts…
September 24th, 2007 at 8:05 am EST
I was not comparing America to other countries … that’s a whole different issue. I was simply using a dramatic introduction about policy priorities to draw our attention on what I feel is a pretty huge domestic problem that I’ve never heard discussed.
In my opinion, one of the great things about America is that things like this can be changed instead of ignored … and I believe that pointing out the problems and voicing my opinions are two of the most patriotic things I can do.
September 24th, 2007 at 8:30 am EST
On the issue of online voting - if it’s safe for me to do ALL of my banking online, why can’t we come up with a safe, reliable way of doing online voting?
Are people’s fears, and rants, about the safety of online voting founded in something or is it an opinion from ignorance and fear?
September 24th, 2007 at 5:49 pm EST
I agree that the government wants to control our votes - Last year when they passed the law requiring photo IDs, our church set up a program to help homeless people get IDs…but it’s still a major problem — Many people are shut out from voting…
I don’t support political apathy, but I don’t really blame people for feeling like it doesn’t make a difference, especially when the electoral college, whoever they are, actually makes the decision. That’s how a president can win the popular vote but still not be voted into the office. You know who I’m talking about. I’m not saying that Al Gore would have been a great choice either — I’d just like to feel like my vote matters. Clearly with the current system, it doesn’t, and I’m sure that the government wants to keep it that way.
At least they have moved to all computer voting! No more papers and punching holes.
September 24th, 2007 at 7:16 pm EST
Yeah, but if Mr. Johnson keeps performing like that on Sundays, I may have to create a Hanging Chad of my own…
September 24th, 2007 at 9:16 pm EST
Lance - I’m amazed that you left out what I percieve to be the single biggest problem with our voting system - the electoral college.
Our forefathers said they didn’t want a two party system, but the way they designed the electoral college *favors* a two party system. If no candidates receive 270 out of 538 electoral votes, then congress choses the next president - regardless of the number of popular votes. So, unless the field is narrowed down to only two candidates, American voters will not be guaranteed their votes even count towards choosing the president. Of course, 4 of our 43 presidents (J.Q. Adams, Hayes, Harrison, and Bush) actually LOST the popular election, but won due to the electoral college so the 2-party system still doesn’t guarantee a democratic election.
With our 2 party system, you rarely find a candidate that aligns entirely with your views. How many democrats are pro-life? How many republicans are environmentally friendly? How many democrats admit that religious and privatized social programs are way more effective than wasting tax dollars on the equivalent government sponsored programs? How many republicans would lobby for a progressive tax? It’s not likely in a 2-party system you’d ever find someone who aligns with your views unless you are a cookie-cutter conservative or liberal. So, middle America is just as likely to vote against a candidate than vote for one. Or, just not vote. Why cast an affirmative vote for someone you wouldn’t want to affirm?
If I had my pick, I’d go for one of the ranking systems: Range Voting, Instant Runoff Voting, or Preferential Voting. Australia is there already. Of course, this won’t ever happen b/c the change requires people other than the typical republican or democrat to sit in the chairs.
September 25th, 2007 at 10:41 pm EST
Oh, it’s getting painful to read news stories like this.
Citizen’s ID, anyone?
September 26th, 2007 at 3:52 am EST
Is requiring photo ID really a “unconstitutional burden” for people?
If we are talking about online voting and that sort of thing, the procedure for that goes WAY beyond the ‘burden’ of getting an ID card from the local dmv. If the lowest common denominator on this is ‘having ID’, we’ll never get online voting.
Is there any doubt this is more a ‘political’ discussion than it is a ‘practical’ one?
October 23rd, 2007 at 5:22 pm EST
I guess saying “well why don’t we just change it so it works better” isn’t going to work here…
but shouldn’t it be that simple? shouldn’t our government be able to change for the people whom it (claims to) serve? I mean, if someone set it up, can’t we do something about it, or at least be able to do something about it in a relatively short amount of time? what if…
the funny thing about those kinds of questions is that they get answered, but nothing ever happens.
oh well.
i’ll die and go to heaven.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:47 pm EST
I’m kind of fond of an idea that I heard Tom Brokaw promoting at a conference a few months ago. He suggested that we take a 3-day weekend to allow the whole country to go to electronic voting kiosks, which would be in malls, libraries, and virtually any public place, enter the pin numbers from their electronic ID’s, and cast their ballots. We make it a national holiday weekend. All votes are calculated electronically–no exit polling, no reliable fodder for the pundits, no East Coast results being broadcast early and skewing the decisions of West Coast voters. Everyone finds out the results together on Monday morning and we get a new president. Too simple, perhaps, but I like it.