Fix the Electoral System

This article appeared in the November 15, 2004 edition of The Nation.

October 28, 2004

Before most votes were cast in the November 2 presidential election, and before any of them were counted, tens of millions of Americans worried about whether the nation's patchwork of systems for casting and counting ballots would break down as badly as it did in 2000. Six in ten Americans surveyed by the Associated Press said it was unlikely that a clear winner would be known by the morning of November 3. That opinion reflects the fact that four years after a close vote in Florida created a thirty-six-day recount battle that ended without all the votes being counted, America has done little to fix its broken electoral system.

The first problem is unequal protection: America has no uniform standard for registering voters, resolving challenges to those registrations, designing ballots, guaranteeing access to the polls, creating a paper trail when votes are cast, counting ballots and, in the case of a close election, recounting them. Instead, there is a collection of fifty-one different systems with often radically different rules. "It's a tragedy in many ways that the standard for accountability and integrity and objectivity is better in many Third World countries than in ours," says former President Jimmy Carter, who explains that the Carter Center, which monitors elections around the world, could not do so in the United States because of a lack of consistent standards and a lack of commitment on the part of both major parties to cooperate with the monitoring process.

The first major problem in effect guarantees the second: A system with inconsistencies rooted in the theory of states' rights, which made possible the original sin of slavery and the secondary sin of segregation, lends itself uniquely and unquestionably to contemporary manifestations of Jim Crow politics. In Ohio, the quintessential swing state, Republicans have recruited 3,600 party loyalists to challenge the qualifications of voters in what the New York Times describes as "heavily Democratic urban neighborhoods of Cleveland, Dayton and other cities." In Wisconsin, another battleground state, the Milwaukee county executive, a Republican, initially refused to allow the printing of what Milwaukee city officials determined to be an appropriate number of ballots to handle an expected surge in voter participation in heavily African-American and Latino neighborhoods in their city. In South Dakota, challenges to Native American voters are expected. And, yes, Florida Governor Jeb Bush's appointed secretary of state was still purging voter lists as the election approached.

Subscriber Login

4 ISSUES FREE

Subscribe Now!

The only way to read this article and the full contents of each week's issue of The Nation online is by subscribing to the magazine. Subscribe now and read this article -- and every article published since for the past five years -- right now.

There's no obligation -- try The Nation for four weeks free.

.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Blogs

» The Beat

House Passes "Historic" Health Reform | Pelosi secures necessary votes, but only after accepting unsettling limits on abortion rights demanded by anti-choice Democrats.
John Nichols
36 Comments

» Editor's Cut

Around The Nation | Obama, one year on. Plus: Jeremy Scahill takes your questions, and a new video series from The Nation.
Katrina vanden Heuvel

» The Notion

Injustice in Illinois | Prosecutors in Illinois should be more concerned with an innocent man behind bars than journalism students' grades.
Ari Berman
28 Comments

» The Dreyfuss Report

Obama Fails in Middle East | Clinton delivers the ultimate diss to Abbas.
Robert Dreyfuss
128 Comments

» Act Now!

Equality Across America | This week, young LBGT activists are staging a National Week of Initiative.
Peter Rothberg
16 Comments

» Altercation

Slacker Thursday | Dying laptops, recapping the election, the Dow, and the Yankees with the World Series.
Eric Alterman