Elections in America Rank Last Among Western Democracies

Elections in America Rank Last Among Western Democracies - Reasons Explained

In the heart of the political spectacle that is the American election, questions about the integrity and performance of the U.S. electoral system have come to the forefront. The Electoral Integrity Project (EIP), an independent research project, compared the risks of flawed and failed elections across 139 countries worldwide from 2012 to 2015.

The EIP's results paint a stark picture, with the U.S. elections rated as the worst among all Western democracies. The 2012 U.S. presidential election ranks 60th out of 180 elections worldwide, while the 2014 U.S. Congressional elections rank even worse, 65th out of 180.

Voter registration was critically viewed, with issues including inaccurate registers and ineligible electors registered. The 2014 report of the bipartisan Presidential Commission on Election Administration documented various vulnerabilities in the conduct of American elections, including long wait times, inaccurate voter registers, insufficiently trained local poll workers, and the breakdown of voting machines. During the 2014 midterm elections, the news media reported a range of problems on polling day, including disruptions to state election websites, malfunctioning electronic voting machines, and confusion over new photo identification requirements.

Campaign finance was also seen by experts as a problem, with concerns about unequal access to public subsidies and political donations. In the 2012 National Election Survey, two-thirds of Americans agreed with the statement that 'Rich people buy elections'. Bernie Sanders has campaigned on his ability to raise funds from multiple small donors, claiming Hillary Clinton has been more beholden to establishment donors and fat fees from corporate speaking engagements.

The worst problem across most states involved gerrymandering of district boundaries to favor incumbents, with a mean score of 42 on a 100-point scale. Other weaknesses concerned whether electoral laws were unfair to smaller parties, favored the governing party, or restricted voter's rights.

However, the voting processes were rated more favorably, with high scores for the vote count and post-election results. Much of Donald Trump's visibility comes from his advantage in attracting free social media and spending less on TV airwaves than any other major candidate. He claims his organization is more self-funded than most presidential campaigns, without support by a super-PAC.

Elections in many newer democracies are seen by experts to perform far better in the global comparison, such as in Lithuania (ranked 4th), Costa Rica (6th), and Slovenia (8th). The top 10 countries in the Perceptions of Electoral Integrity Index 2015 included Denmark, Finland, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, and Switzerland; the United States ranked 26th in this list.

The author argues that a large part of the blame for the poor performance of American elections can be attributed to the degree of decentralization and partisanship in American electoral administration, as well as the role of money in American campaigns and the Citizens United Supreme Court decision.

As the world watches the unfolding of the American election, the spotlight on the electoral system's weaknesses and the need for reform remains undiminished. The EIP's findings serve as a call to action, urging for a more transparent, fair, and efficient electoral process in the United States.