San Jose State University Britains Electoral and Plurality System Discussion

Write about 200 – 250 words each in Prompt 1 and Prompt 2

Afterwards, comment on 2 classmates in Prompt 1 work on either you agree or disagree along with the grounds for your agreement or disagreement. (100 Words on each classmate)

Then, comment on 2 classmates in Prompt 2 work on either you agree or disagree along with the grounds for your agreement or disagreement. (100 Words on each classmate)

Prompt 1:  The U.S. stands out among the former British dominions that share Britain’s electoral system, commonly known as ‘first past the post’ or ‘winner take all.’ The U.S. version is called single-member plurality system.

This system does not provide effective representation to minority views or people  that are more or less evenly distributed across the country and as Duverger’s law suggests, it ends up in a 2-party system. Especially when socialist movement is weak unlike other former British colonies such as Canada and India, the parties turn into big tents of quite divergent, even conflicting ideologies. As a result, what goes as social democrat in Europe, goes as liberal in the U.S. Even further, with the absence of alternatives, minority views and people, such as African-Americans do not have leverage as they would have in a multi-party system, where more than just Democratic Party would have tried to represent their interests, and this would have created competition among parties to get their votes. 

In your opinion, should do U.S. change the electoral system to Proportional Representation for better representation and a more balanced national politics where different ideologies and positions can be represented under new parties instead of being locked into only two parties?  What would be the effects on the Presidency if the U.S. had more than 2 parties both during election time and during different presidential administrations?

Prompt 2: The U.S. boasts longest popular government and a constitution with a bill of rights that has some of the most protected civil liberties in the world history. Most Americans see the U.S. as the beacon of democracy but most outside observers are surprised to see how voting is made very difficult for many citizens, giving the impression to outside observers that the government deliberately tries to keep certain people away from the ballot boxes. 

In the U.S., elections are often marred with controversies. In the past, those were more about blatantly discriminatory practices such as racial gerrymandering , poll tax, literacy tests, all-white primaries. Today most people think those problems have been solved with the Civil Rights era. But there are still some widespread practices that are debated:

1. Strict voter registration requirements as opposed to automatic voter registration.

2. Elections held on a work-day where millions will have to forego their daily wages in order to vote.

3.  Voter purging and voter caging. (see for instance: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/27/us/elections/georgia-voters-purge.html )  (Links to an external site.)

4. Reduced numbers of polling stations in black-majority neighborhoods and reduced hours that do not accommodate people who do not get out of work early.

5. Felons and ex-felons stripped off their right to vote.

6. Immigration sweeps whereby newly naturalized citizens are often intimidated.

7. Limiting early, absentee, and mail-in voting.

8. Challenging the credentials of voters at the polling stations and intimidating ID checks. 

Even after all these challenges, the efficacy of one’s vote may be seriously curtailed by i) Census  practices that undercount poorer, wage-laborer, and less literate citizens ii) Redistricting that is done by state legislatures to favor their own parties rather than independent agencies as in many other countries iii) The institution of the Electoral College where faithless electors can simply vote for the other candidate iv) No national federal agency to undertake elections in a completely bipartisan and autonomous manner as the conduct of elections is left to the states.  

Given these governmental policies that deliberately target racial minorities, poor citizens and immigrant communities and with an already less representative system of single-member plurality method, to what extent can we talk about free and fair elections in the U.S. ? Especially do minorities and working class people have a say in government as much as the majority white population? More specifically, is there one-person one vote as an established principle in the U.S. government as it is the basic minimum of democracy?

Depending on whether your answer is there are still free and fair elections or there are not, how can we either rectify this system or make it better? 

State your position and provide a clear reasoning and justification. You can give logical justifications and illustrate your position by examples from current or past politics.