Debate on our Election systems

[Mississippi Political Freak]

As a concerned observer of our election system, I'd like to raise a few questions here:

1. Is the US the only developed country in the world that allows politicians to draw electoral (congressional and state legislative) districts ?

2. Are we also unique among industrialized democracies to allow partisan administration of elections (elected SoS's and/or county election officials are partisan figures and may serve on other political campaigns)?

3. Why are Republicans so obsessed with combating voter fraud even though expert evidence states that fraud is minimal in our elections?

4. Why are Democrats more supportive on expanding voter access and improve the easiness to vote than Republicans?

In my opinion, elections is a too critical area of our democracy to allow different states and localities to set its own standards.  Instead, I strongly believe in a federal standard in the drawing of political districts and election administration, with adjustments for demographic factors.

[Antonio the Sixth]

1. No, France does too, and the government does that directly through legislation.
2. I guess that the Interior Ministry manages elections in most countries. You'd hardly find more partisan than that, yet it usually doesn't give problems.
3. Depends. It is arguable that fraud decided the outcome of two presidential elections.
4. Because people who have the most difficulties to vote are usually poors/minorities, ie a democratic electorate.

[Hash]

1. Is the US the only developed country in the world that allows politicians to draw electoral (congressional and state legislative) districts ?

No. France's government is in charge of redistricting and can do whenever it feels like it. Theoretically, there is some sort of oversight commission which in 2009 was a fraud filled with party hacks and there is a parliamentary vote on the matter but it's not like parliamentarians are honest people. France has a long tradition of gerrymandering or toying around with electoral law which goes back to the 1830s. The Second Empire was particularly famous for its gerrymandering skills, given that by 1852 the Interior Minister wrote to all departmental prefects asking them for their thoughts on how to best gerrymander their department and keep those who "voted the wrong way" from electing an opposition member. The Third Republic didn't continue the gerrymandering tradition, but the Fourth Republic toyed with electoral law in 1951 and the Fifth Republic's three redistrictings in 1958, 1986 and 2009 were all done by the Interior Ministry and its various experts. France particularly enjoys rurban gerrymandering, aka the division of urban centres voting left-wing and combining parts of them with rural areas. Gerrymandering also extends to local government, given that the state is in charge of cantonal boundaries and when it does change them (every 20-30 years) it usually gerrymanders them to ensure rural over representation.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

French elections are run by the Interior Ministry, but they're actually rather honest when it comes to administering elections. That being said, candidates can and often do take disputed elections and violations of electoral law/campaign finance law to the Constitutional Council, which has the power to void certain elections and at worse to disqualify certain people from holding office (and the ConCon is very tough on electoral law). The Interior Ministry in Spain, Italy and a bunch of other countries are also in charge of elections. Of course, elections being run by the government are not optimal (especially given how incompetent the French Interior Ministry is at storing old election returns) but they're certainly not more likely to be fraudulent nowadays.

Of course, in the past, when the government ran elections it was obviously not for fun but rather to control the outcomes. Up till 1923, the Spanish Interior Ministry made up most election returns for rural areas. Under the Second Empire, the government was actively involved in the campaigns of the government candidate. Under the Third Republic, local deputies often made use of local resources and local officials for their campaigns though not necessarily in a way which made elections frauds.

[Mississippi Political Freak]

So why does the US seems to be less capable of administrating elections in a honest/unbiased manner compared to these European countries?  Thanks!

[The Economist]

So why does the US seems to be less capable of administrating elections in a honest/unbiased manner compared to these European countries?  Thanks!

That's a pretty slanted question, don't you think? 99% of our elections are honestly administered without bias and the winner in 99.99% of the situation is truly the winner.

[Mississippi Political Freak]

I should have rephrase that:  why is partisan influence on election administration more prominent in the US compared to Europe?  Thanks!

[Franzl]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, not the only one, but perhaps the country where it's done most blatantly.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps unique is the fact that the chief observer of elections in many states is elected to an office which has almost the sole purpose of running elections.

But as Antonio said, the departments that run election are usually in some way "partisan" in the sense that those running them aref from political parties

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's kind of a biased question. Few people have been caught committing voter fraud, that doesn't necessarily mean that there aren't a lot of cases that don't go unnoticed.

That said, it's not nearly enough of a problem that it has any effect on most elections.

Why do Republicans make it out to be a bigger problem than it is? It leads to lower turnout. Lower turnout is good for Republicans, generally speaking.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

For the same reason that Republicans aren't. Expanding the electorate (legally or illegally) helps Democrats win elections.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That, of course, would only work for federal elections. Any further federal regulations would certainly be unconstitutional.

That's probably one of the main problems with nationwide popular vote efforts for President, that every state would still have their own standards.