The political landscape in the United States has never been as divided as it currently is. Heated debates can be found on both sides of the political spectrum, much to the disdain of the other side. Without taking sides, though, what if it isn’t left-wing radicals or far-right conservatives that have created the situation we find ourselves in? Could it be that the entire political system suffers from two very outdated concepts?
It’s a tricky topic, we know. The Electoral College goes back almost 200 years and is a major part of the US electoral system. However, it is an inherently unfair system. So, too, is the concept of having near-limitless fundraising, which always ensures only the super-rich or lobbyists can get into the White House. Both of these can be argued to be shameful stains on what we call the world’s biggest democracy. There are democracies in many smaller Western countries that are infinitely more democratic than our system. Might it be time to revisit these two topics and propose a change? Let’s find out.
The Electoral College: An Outdated System
The Electoral College was created as a means of balancing the power of US states in the 18th Century and, in no small part, helped to appease so-called slave states at the time. Clearly, the origins of this system are no longer relevant in the 21st-Century United States. When they lose, both Democrats and Republicans have no qualms complaining about the electoral voting system and praise it when it works for them.
Most will agree that this system is irreparably flawed. You can win the popular vote and have tens of millions of votes more than your rivals but still lose the keys to the White House. The Electoral College system provides disproportionate influence for small states, and you don’t have to look far to find instances of it not working – Bush in 2000 and Trump in 2016, to name just a few.
Politics for the Rich and Elite
It isn’t just the Electoral College system that is broken and no longer fit for purpose, though. The level of money and fundraising involved in entering politics is now borderline a joke. Elon Musk’s fundraising for Trump’s campaign, coupled with the social media presence he added, essentially bought an election, and it isn’t the first time this has happened. Lobbying ensures favor for companies with potential presidents. When an organization ships millions of dollars to a candidate under the proviso that the potential President-Elect will give them favor upon being elected, how is this not bribery?
The sheer amount of fundraising (some of it anonymous, which opens it up to outside interference) only ensures political continuity for the elite. Elected officials are de facto lobbyists, lobbying for the very companies that funded their campaigns. Poor candidates haven’t got a chance. They face insurmountable odds with limited to no media exposure or advertisements whatsoever. Remember, precious few independents or smaller parties are ever invited to debates.
Why It’s an Issue
Billion-dollar campaigns effectively mean that the average American can’t even hope to enter a presidential contest, let alone win one. Poorer candidates simply don’t have the funding and miss out. In short, you’re always going to get a choice between two leaders, and two is only one more than an autocracy – it’s hardly anywhere near the number of candidates elections in European democracies put up for election. Electability is, instead, reserved for the wealthy and the connected. It isn’t based on the strength of an individual’s policies or their manifesto.
The Electoral College voting system is also problematic in that you end up with marginalized communities often underrepresented. This system essentially means that the full voice of the people isn’t heard and is drowned out in an archaic system that hardly seems relevant to the modern United States.
What Needs to Change?
The US Constitution can be troublesome in that many Americans are reluctant to change it. Instead, modern politicians simply decide to interpret the Constitution in a way that they see fit. You only have to look at US gun laws to see that in action. While touching the Constitution is divisive, it isn’t as though it hasn’t been done before, with numerous amendments made in its history.
To better serve the American voters, the political landscape could do with an increase in coverage for smaller parties and more of a focus on independent candidates. The abolition of the Electoral College would go some way to make the voting process fairer, and more transparency in regards to public campaign finances, alongside potential donation and fundraising caps and laws demanding transparency about where those donations come from, would undoubtedly help. The first step is breaking the link between influence and wealth in media campaigns; where we go from there should then be put out to consultation, and if the voters demand change, they should receive it.
