Systemic Bias in the Democratic Process
Much has been made about whether or not the United States is truly a democratic country. The nature of this debate stems from the different ways that democracy is defined. Many scholars, including Howard Zinn have defined democracy operationally rather than conclusively thus creating a focus that goes beyond political institutions and addresses the quality of life of the citizens. This focus on equality and fairness of outcomes generally leads to the conclusion that America is not that democratic. On the other hand, many other scholars, including Sidney Hook, have argued that democracy does not have to do with outcomes, but rather it is about the procedural process, specifically the concept of majority
…show more content…
Every ten years, district boundaries are redrawn. Although the Constitution guarantees that your vote is secret, the fact of whether or not you voted in the election, as well as your political party, sex and age are made public. Both political parties have access to this information and use it to their advantage while redrawing election districts. The United States Constitution specifies that representative’s seats should be proportional to the decennial census but says nothing about how states should draw district boundaries for representatives. The party in control of redistricting can weaken the opposition by “packing” as many opposition voters as possible into a minimum number of conceded districts, and/or “cracking” opposition voters among numerous safe districts where they are in the minority. This process is inherently undemocratic because it often creates representative results that are substantially different from the overall population. Therefore, the will of the people is subverted for political gain because there is not equal representation of citizens in government. Furthermore, the process of gerrymandering determines many political races before they actually take place, which clearly takes away power from the individual. There are many realistic steps that could streamline this …show more content…
This is because in terms of procedures, there are voter identification laws as well as implicit bias that makes it harder for certain types of people to vote. In addition, the process of gerrymandering undermines the will of the people. In terms of substantive democracy, the monopoly of the two parties in the political realm, and the lack of other information and options available to the average citizen undermine the opportunity for real change. In addition, the unequal protection under the law, through the incarceration system, makes it impossible for us to live in a genuine multiracial democracy. Although procedural and substantive viewpoints of democracy are seen as diametrically opposing one another, the truth is that they are interconnected. If there is a threat to one it often creates a threat to the other. This is easy to see if procedural democracy is what is threatened but not easy to see the other way around. However, it still exists, for example, the substantive issue of incarceration undermines the procedural issue of voting. Furthermore, the substantive issue of the centralization and spread of power, specifically the disproportionate amount of influence that wealthy special interest groups have on political decisions, threatens the very essence of “majority rules.” In conclusion, with procedural and substantive barriers to democracy
Society cannot let factions become disenfranchised and lose their self determination. The United States, a country founded upon the ideals of freedom and individual prosperity, cannot hold unjust elections brought upon by the current dominant political party. President Johnson created a bipartisan effort to pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965, enriching democracy and continuing the American spirit of democratic values. Johnson united Congress with the simple message, “Our mission is at once the oldest and the most basic of this country: to right wrong, to do justice, to serve man.” (Johnson) Today, the citizens of the United States must push Congress formulate an oversight measure to fix voter
Janda, Kenneth. Berry, Jeffrey. Goldman, Jerry (2008). The Challenge of Democracy (9th ed.). Boston; New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Redistricting is the legislative political process of redrawing the geographic boundaries of congressional district based on population following the decennial census. Each state is obligated to adhere to certain Supreme Court requirements regarding redistricting. Respective districts within a state should ensure population equality, contiguity, compactness and no discrimination against minority. Districts can be drawn to protect incumbents. The process of deliberately modifying districts in order to increase the partisan advantage of a particular political party is called gerrymandering.
To begin with, there are three fundamental concepts of redistricting. Population equality requires the same number of people in each district. Continuity requires that districts must be a continuous shape. Districts must be a compact shape, without jagged edges or extensions. Partisan gerrymandering requires that one party redistricts to give that party a majority in more districts. This controls
Every ten years after a census, politicians redraw the district boundaries that determine the house and state legislature. The problem with this system is that the same politicians who redraw the district boundaries are the ones who are being elected by the
In American politics today, many practices exist that greatly harm the American public. One of these dangerous practices, known as gerrymandering, occurs in nearly every state. While some claim that the practice helps America, in reality gerrymandering harms American democracy and safety. Gerrymandering greatly affects society, and must become illegal to insure fair representation, the democratic processes in America continues, and America continues to thrive.
After seeing all of the dangers associated with gerrymandering, I have to support the efforts undertaken by many Americans to regulate the way in which Congressional Districts are re-drawn every ten years. The current system allows the state legislatures to marginalize millions of Americans by taking away their voting power. Some advocates for redistricting reform have proposed plans that call for bipartisan
The political culture that defines American politics shows that despite this compromise, America is still very much a democratic society. The very history of the country, a major contributor to the evolution of its political culture, shows a legacy of democracy that reaches from the Declaration of Independence through over two hundred years to today’s society. The formation of the country as a reaction to the tyrannical rule of a monarchy marks the first unique feature of America’s democratic political culture. It was this reactionary mindset that greatly affected many of the decisions over how to set up the new governmental system. A fear of simply creating a new, but just as tyrannic... ...
Piven’s assessment of the effectiveness of the American system of democratic representation, is best explained through her theory that it is not until people step out of the norms of society and politics that they realize the power that they have in the democratic system of representation; or, more realistically, the power that they don’t have. 5. The government and the media put out the idea that we live in a world where the vote is the power, and if you vote, you have the power to change things. And if you view this idea very closely, the system of democratic representation is a spectacular one. But this world cannot be looked at through foggy glasses, and this system is not, by any means, a perfect one.
Although the rules and regulations for voting in the United States have been changed over the course of history, there are some major updates needed to the voting system as a whole. The system used today may have worked well in the past, but with the hardcore and fast-paced politics used today, and the advancements in technology over the past few centuries, the system has holes throughout it, and has failed time and time again, with a good possibility of failing once again in future elections.
As a democratic government, voting is the foundation of the American governmental system and, in extension, the American way of life in general. Voting is considered to be so incremental to the American way of life that it is mentioned in four Constitutional Amendments. These "four separate Amendments – the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th, even use the same powerful language to protect Americans right to vote: 'The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged ...'" (Donnelly). The question is, however, are new voting laws designed in a way that inherently infringes on the rights of people, or is their purpose primarily to protect the integrity of the voting system? While this issue is controversial, the limits
One of the greatest things America is known for is its democracy. We were founded on the principles of democracy, we continue to try and uphold the ideals of democracy, and we consistently intervene in on other countries in an attempt to have them become a democratic nation. Despite the effort, however, even in a nation as powerful as America, our democracy is both flawed and fragile. If we take into account the Electoral College as our foundation of democracy, bipartisanism, and the notion of politicians and elections being bought by corporations, PACs, and SuperPACs, it is clear to see that our democracy is a far cry from perfect.
Modern society has deemed that to qualify as democratic, said government must be “inclusive.” For example, Dahl states in “On Democracy” that the term “democracy” was applied to past political systems that would in no way qualify as true democracies by modern standards. Dahl uses the example of representative democracies of the past in Britain and the United States. These changes in standards makes defining a democracy a somewhat impossible task. Tilly makes mention of four different definitions used by academics in assessing political systems. These definitions are categorized as either “constitutional, substantive, procedural, and process-oriented” (Tilly 7). Tilly though goes on to state that the first three definitions are misleading and work within a vacuum of reality. Therefore, process-oriented definitions and approaches to assessing democracy are considered the best definitions for democratic political systems. Tilly states that process oriented definitions, “ Identify some minimum set of process that must be continuously in motion for situation to qualify as democratic” and that Dahl’s five criteria for democracy meets this type of definition (Tilly 9). Thus definition democracy is not so much about concrete structures, but if a minimum criteria is met. Dahl’s five institutions, effective participation, voting quality, enlightening understanding, control of the agenda, and inclusion of adults,
Nowadays, democracy is more developed and modernized than before and is still at the heart of the political and sociological debates. In general, a democratic country is characterized by the right of its people to choose its rulers through competitive elections, respect of the law, and the guarantee of people’s rights. Those are the basics of democracy, but many authors and political scientists have varying observations and definitions of it. However, a country does not automatically become a democracy; it has to go through many obstacles
The term democracy does not have a unanimous definition; however it could be understood in a more substantive manner as a political regime that protects the freedom of individuals and express the will of the majority through free and fair elections, protection of minority rights and respect for basic human rights. Notwithstanding this general conception of democracy, there is no consensus on precisely how to define or measure democracy. Scholars approach democracy in various ways. An example of a much used minimalist definition is that of Joseph Schumpeter’s. He describes t...