mechanisms continued and outcomes

mechanisms continued and outcomes

1. EC

   • the president is not elected by popular vote but through the EC. usually the candidate who wins the popular vote wins the EC however, this was nto the case in 2016 as clinton won 2,0000 more popualr votes than trump but he won the EC.
   • how it works
     • each state is awarded a number of electoral college votes. this is equal to the states representation in congress. e.g. the 2 senators + the number of representatives. for example california had 55 and wyoming had 3.
     • in total there are 538 EC votes and to win 270 needed to be won.
     • the popular vote for each cndidate is counted in each state. in most states there is a winner takes all system where whoever wins the most popular votes in a state wins all the EC votes. however this is a convention and is not followed by Maine and nebraska.
     • the EC never meets together. the members meet in their state capital on the monday after the second wednesday in december and send their results to the vice, who counts and announces the result in early january.
     • if no candidate wins an absolute majority the presidential candidate would be elected by the HoR. each state would have one vote and the winner would need an absolute majority. the vice would be elected by the senate. this has only happened twice- 1800 and 1824
   • strengths
     • it preserves the voice of small population states
       • if the EC was abolished small states worry that their inhabitants would becoem almost worthless aside states like california. e.g. california has 55 and wyoming has 3.
     • promotes a two horse race
       • this is important in an election for a president who is head of the executive and head of state - a symbol of unity. the winner will tend to win more than 50% if the popular vote which may unite the nation.
   • weaknesses
     • small states are overrepresented
       • in 2012 california had 55 votes representign 37 million people but whyoming had 3 representing half a million inhabitants. this means california recieves one vote per 675,000 people while wyoming recieved one vote for 185,000 people
     • winner takes all distorts the results
       • bill clinton only won 49% of the popular vote but won over 70% of the EC vote. this happened in 2016 when trump won 46% of the vote and 56% of the electoral college votes
     • unfair to national third parties
       • in 1980 john anderson was running as an indeoendent and won 6.6.% of the vote but did nto correlate to one electoral college vote. this is true for all independetns or third parties who have run for president.
       • regional third parties do better- the american independence party candidate george wallace won 13.5% of the popular vote and he mamaged to win five states with 45 ec votes
     • rogue electors
       • many states have laws stating that the ec electors musy cast their ballots for the state wide popular vote winner. others dont whih can result in rogue electors who may cast their ballot the other way. this clearly happened in the trump election
     • the president and vice of different parties
       • when political parties of today did not exist it did not matter if the president and vice were of different parties, as a result of the system used in the case of the electoral college deadlock. in 2000 it was possible that the HoR could have chosen republican bush and the sente could have chosen democrat lieberman as vice
   • possible reforms
     • congressional district system
       • the 48 states should adopt the system used in maine and nebraska which involves awarding one EC vote to a candidate for each congressional district that they win and two electoral votes to the canddate who is the state wide winner.
       • this would lead to only marginal differences as in 2002 the main system would have produced an unproportional result as al gore would have lost the EC by 38 instead of 4.
     • proportional system
       • give votes proportional to the popular vote in each state. this would resut in more equal allocationand be fairer to national third parties
       • however, it could resutl in more people voting for third parties and no candidate wins an overall majority of the EC votes thrwoing the election to congress
     • direct election
       • polls show that some americans woudl favour a move to a directly elected president. most americans feel the EC is unfair. however, only a constitutional amendment could bring about this change. with all the small states wedded to the current system the two thirds majority needed success is unlikely

2. congressional elections

   • congressional elections are held every 2 years and and are for the whole house and one third of the senate
   • both houses are now directly elected thanks to the 17th amendments that abolished senators being elected by state legislators
   • timing
     • they occur every two years. members of the hor serve 2 year terms abd senators serve 6. one third of the senate is elected every 2 years. the elections are held the first tuesday after the first monday in november
     • they coincide with the presidential election
   • constitutional requirements
     • requirements for a representative
       • at least 25
       • us citizen for 7 years
       • resident of the state they represent
     • there are laws regarding age, citizenship and rsidency. most states have a law saying that a representative has to be a a rwsident in the congressional district theyr represent. this is the locality rule
     • requirements for a senator
       • at least 30 years old
       • US citizen for 9 years
       • resident of the state they represent
   • the nomination process
     • to gain a seat in congress teh candidate has to be nominated by one of the two major parties. third party candidates rarely win seats. securing the nomination may require running in the congressonal primary- they are held in the months prior to the election.
     • sometimes an incumbent senator or representative might be challanged and wil have to contest a primary. in 2012 only 8 incumbents were defeated
       • te incumbent rate is high
   • trends
     • coat-tails effect
       • the effect of a strong candidate for a party at the top of the ticket helping other candidates of the same party to get elected at the same time
       • a clear example of this was shown when reagan ran for the republicans and they gained 33 seats in the house and 12 in the senate
       • there has also been a reverse cattails effect. this was shown with clinton won the presidency but the democrats lost nine seats int he house
       • jacobsen points out that president usually gets more done in congress the more seats they have in the house and senate
       • a partisan sweep in presidential and congressional electiosn sends a message to al politicians in washington. even members fo the opposition party who survives will be wary of falling foul of a popular president
     • split ticket voting
       • someone votes for candidates of different parties for different offices at the same election. e.g. republican president and democrat congressman
       • due to elections being more candidate orientated it doesnt seem odd to american voters. there is some evidence that voters think in terms of a divided government.
     • strongish support for incumbents
       • some have had high re-election rates in the last 2 decades, especially in the house. voters generally think that heir representatives and senators are doing a good job and deserve to be re-elected.
     • fewer competative races in house elections
       • between 192 and 2004 there was a significant trend towards fewer competative seats. a competative seat is one that was won by the incumbent by less than 10 percentage points, this figure has fallen to 31 by 2004. this meant the majority of house members were in a safe seat the cause of this is thought to be the re-drawing of congressional district bounaries- gerrymandering
   • voting behaviour
     • the difficultly in analysis comes in differentiating voting behaviour in congressional elections that coincide with presdiential elections from voting behaviour in those that do not.
     • local issues
       • voters in congressional elections tend to cast their ballot on local issues and the record of the incumbent. farm subsidie decide the vote in kansas. the regulation of the logging industry decides the votes in oregon. immigration laws decide the vote in texas.
     • record of incumbent members
       • voters consider the record of the incumbent. failing to vote and look after state interests can mean defeat.
         • barrow man was in a tight spot for re-election due to the re-drawing of the districts which made it more republican leaning. he also had to attract the african american voters. eh made a TV ad endorsing gun control but in terms of keeping peple safe and referring to it as protecting against lynching

3. midterm elections

   • the election of the whole house and one third of the senate that occur mid way through the 4 year term of the presdient
   • the presidents party tends to lose
     • the presidents party tends to loose seats in the house and senate
       • n 2014 13 seats were lost in the house and 9 in the senate.
     • there is often a reverse coattails effect and midterms are a chance to show dissapointment with the president
   • 2010
     • the democrats lost 63 seats in the house this was the worst since 1922. they also lost 6 senate seats
       • most of those who lost were democratic house members who were in districts where voters has voted for mcCain
     • the democrat losses in the senate were mainly open races following the retirement of 4 incumbents. two incumbens lost
     • pollsters found that peopel had voted for obama as an agent of change but now he seemed like more of the same

4. propositions, referendumsand recall elections

   • propositions
     • a mechanism commonly known as an initiative by whic citizens of a state can place proposed laws- in some states constitutional amendments- on the ballot
       • t bypasses the legislature
         • 24 states take part
     • direct
       • proposals that qualify go straight on the ballot
     • indirect
       • submitted to the state legislature which decides further action. rules vary from state to state. in some states it goes on the ballot even if rejected by the state legislature, submits a different proposal or takes no action at all.
     • when it comes to rules no state is the same. however there are general rules of thumb
       • filed by a designated state official
       • reviewed for conformance with state legal requirements
       • given a formal title and brief summary on the ballot paper
       • circulated to gain the certain number of signatres
       • submit to state officials for verification of signatures
       • the number of signatures vary. some say 10% of the vote cast in the last GE.
     • recent examples
       • medical use of marijuana
         • rejected in all 4 states
       • secret ballots for labour union elections
         • approved in arizons
       • banning AA programmes
         • aproved in arizona
       • greenhouse gases
         • rejected in california
       • same sex marriage
         • approved in maryland
     • pros
       • provides a way of enacting reforms on controversial issues
         • e.g. campaign finance reform
       • increase responsiveness and accountability
       • helps increase voter turn out
         • this was the case with same sex marriage ban which attracted large numbers of republican conservaties
       • increases interest in state policy issues
     • cons
       • ack flexibility
         • once a measure is drafted, approved and put on th bill it cannot be amended until after it has been adopted , some states limit the power to change an adopted proposition
         • lacks the benefits of the legislative process
       • vulnerable to manipulation by pressure groups- high spending campaigns and media advertising blitzed featurign somewhat simplistic and misleading arguments can carry the day
   • recall elections
     • voters can remove an elected official. it is a political process permitted by 19 states
     • recall of state governors
       • have been three recall elections for state governors all three have been successful
       • the first wa governor frazier, then davis who was defeated by arnold schwarzenegger who served as governor until 2011. then there was walker, the recall was triggered by opposition to his implementation of changes to state employee pension schemes annd limiting the collective bargaining rights of trade unions within the state
     • recal of state legislators
       • have been 36 used speradicall. it increased democratic accounatbility and means that elected officials are directly accountable all of the time . some say they are demeaning to the democratic process as they allow indulgence in buyers regret. it could destabilise the governing process and result in incertainty.
         • 6 during the 90s- 2 successful and four not
         • 11 in 2011 and 4 in 2012 of the 15, 10 survived
       • some say voters should have to live with the consequences of thier vote
   • referendums
     • it is an electoral device where voters can veto a bill passed by the state legislature. they are similar to propositions, but they follow from something the state have already done. a number of states require that changes to the state constitution must be approved in a statewide referenum. in 2012 115 referendums were put ont he state ballot
     • 24 states go further and have a popular referendum- if the state legislature passes a law that the voters do not approve of, they may gather sufficient sugnatures to demand a referendum. there is a 90 day period after the law id passed where the petition must take place. once enough signatures have been gathered the new law appears on the ballot for a popular referendum. if it is not rejected the law takes effect but is it is rejected the law becomes void- acts as a popular veto