By: Paul Ji, John Mark Shorack, Ibis Almada, and Katherine Szetu.
Our group did an internet research on how to improve the electoral process of the United States. In order to do so, we used the election results and other online information to study the 2000 and 2008 presidential elections to come to certain conclusion.
The 2000 Presidential Election Analysis:
Selection process: What are the strengths and weaknesses of the process? Does it produce the best pool of presidential candidates?
The candidates that ran on the ballot were: George W. Bush for the Republicans, Albert Gore Jr. for the Democratic Party, Ralph Nader for the Green Party, Patrick Buchanan for the Reformist and Harry Browne for the Libertarian. The selection process was done by each party’s primaries. They then sent out their most qualified candidate to debate with the other, and run for office. The strengths of this system is that each party sends only one candidate so it is not a very long list, and that the people still have a wide variety of candidates that can be chose from. On the other hand, its weaknesses are that some people might not vote because of the specific candidates on the ballot, and the candidates are being grouped by a party which gives the opportunity for voters to not even have researched.
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2000
Party primaries: How effective are primaries in selecting the most qualified nominee?
According to the US Election Atlas in 2000 the Republican party had six nominees in the primary voting and Democratic Party had three nominees. At the primaries the main idea is to promote the candidate. The party does speeches, activities and rallies to get full of energy for the coming elections. For the Democratic Party, President Bill Clinton spoke to the crowd and filled them with anticipation for the elections. During the primary there is a wide range of nominees to choose from, and at the end of the primary the nation votes for the best one. The primaries are pretty effective at picking the most qualified nominee, because it allows the people to choose the best candidate out of all the nominees. The most qualified nominee will be backed by most citizens and then lead the party to the general election by uniting them under his race for office to become an even stronger party.
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?f=0&year=2000&elect=2
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?f=0&year=2000&elect=1
Vice presidential selection: Who should be chosen?
The vice presidential selection is very complex. A vice president might be chosen for several reasons: First of all, because it will unite more the political party; second, because the person is from an important state or geographic location; and third, because the nomination might benefit the party’s cause. Even though many people undermine the vice presidents authority many vice presidents later run for the Presidents office and have a good chance of winning. The running mate that should be chosen by the party is one that units the party, helps them gain some swing states, and will be a good Presidential candidate in the future.
http://www.fandm.edu/politics/2000-vice-presidential-selection
Electoral College: How does it affect the campaign and the outcome?
The campaigning of the party’s focus directly on the electoral college votes. The party’s discover the swing states and pour the most money into them. For example, California’s tendency is to vote Democratic. For this reason, the Democratic Party will not advertise as much in California because they expect to win, instead they will advertise a lot in Florida where there is a possibility to lose and the electoral votes are needed. In the 2000 elections, the electoral college voted a majority for George Bush, contrary to the popular vote. This can seem contradictory, but the American system works in a way that gives each state a different value, and thus the candidates work on winning the most important states, not the actual popular vote.
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/elecpop.htm
Campaign financing: What role does it play in the election?
The presidential campaign financing of 2000, had a total contribution of $528.9 million, and spend of $343.1 million. As one of the biggest candidates, the Republican running, Governor G.W Bush said no to matching funds and recollected more than $90 million only on individual contributions, setting a record for history, due to the great amount of money he was able to recollect from only the people. The FEC also reported that 108 senate candidates rose $327.2 million for their campaign. Most of the money raised by the mayor parties, the democrats and republicans, was used on television ads; together they spent $79.9 million. President Bush even spent $10.8 million, into California thinking he could win it, yet he lost, when candidate Al Gore had not spend a single cent on ads for California. Many donations also came from companies and famous people, though candidates tend to avoid bragging about it because they can look bad, or corrupted. The financing from the 2000 campaign came from great donations from the people and were mainly used to create media publicity.
http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/presfin04.html
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/totals.php?cycle=2008
The media: Do they provide fair coverage of the candidates?
Media was the most powerful source of advertising that the candidates used in the elections of 2000. The parties actually spend more money on ads than they did on their actual candidate; the republican committee together with the Democratic committee spent $79.9 million on television ads. The independent groups decided to help the mayor parties and spent $14 million in ads for candidate Al Gore, and $2.1 million on ads for the Republican, George Bush. On election night media excellently showed the electoral map and it’s progress, but before Election Day, there was obvious bias from each of the news sites that made each one unfair for the candidate they were not rooting for. Media played a big role on the 2000 presidential election, by being the biggest source of advertisement and keeping up on election night.
http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/2000_presidential_race_first_in_modern_history_where_political_parties_spen/
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/mar2001/med1-m14.shtml
Voter registration and voting procedures: How fair are they in various states?
Voter registration and voter procedure was and is very similar and even the same in the majority of the fifty states. The voters requirements are the same, be at least 18 years old, be a U.S citizen, and a resident of the state you will vote in. In North Dakota the process changes a little, since it is the only state without voter registration. They claim to be such a small place that they just know who should be voting and who should not. Voting was fair all around the country for the 2000 elections, except in Atlanta Florida, where people had issues on their voting process. The problem was due to problems with the voting machines, causing voters to not be able to cast their ballot, because they were not given help with language, due to the fact that they were mistakenly added to the list of delinquents, when they were not. This caused a lawsuit, to reform Florida’s voting process. Voting registration and voting procedure were fair on the 2000 elections for all the country, discounting the state of Florida.
https://vip.sos.nd.gov/pdfs/Portals/votereg.pdf
http://elect.ky.gov/voterinfo/Pages/voterinformationguide.aspx
http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/eleifv/howreg.htm
http://www.aclufl.org/issues/voting_rights/election_reform.cfm
The 2000 Presidential Election Analysis:
Selection process: What are the strengths and weaknesses of the process? Does it produce the best pool of presidential candidates?
The selection process, also known as preselection, is to choose in advance usually on the basis of a particular criterion. In the case of the presidential election, it is the process by which a candidate is selected to contest an election for political office. The United States has implemented the system in which each political party has their own primaries and conventions in order to pick their nominee. Once the nominee for the party has been selected, they compete with the nominees of the other political parties for the presidential office. The strength of this process is that there would not be so many politicians to vote on when the election occurs, but the problem is that the current system that is implemented in the United States is somewhat unfair for the minor parties. Even though they put a nominee at the head, they cannot compete with the Democratic nominee or the Republican one. People argue that it is fair in that each party has the same chance as anybody else, but that is not true. If it were to be fair and produce the best pool of presidential candidates, all of the nominees should have the same chances and opportunities to compete each other on a national level.
Party primaries: How effective are primaries in selecting the most qualified nominee?
The party primaries are elections held within the party to choose their nominee. Since the United States is a bipartisan political system, the primaries that are important are the Democratic and Republican primary. In the 2008 Republican primary, John McCain won with ease, winning over about 1,575 delegates within the Republican party, and became the nominee. However, the Democratic primary was a little bit more complicated due to the close race between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Although Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, Obama won the nomination with a surprising number of delegates of 2,285 while Clinton had 1,973. As shown in the Democratic primary, and even in the 2004 presidential election itself, the way the primaries are set is somewhat unfair and not very democratic. The fact that Obama got the nomination over Clinton despite the fact that he did not have the popular vote makes the American public wonder whether or not the process in which Obama became the nominee makes him the most qualified candidate.
Vice presidential selection: Who should be chosen?
The selection of the vice president is somewhat similar to that of the party nominee. However, the difference is that the vice presidents are chosen to balance the ticketing and support of the presidential candidate. The person that becomes the vice president, assisting the president, should be someone who should be qualified to lead and run the country in case something happens to the president. In the 2008 election, there was a controversy that the vice presidential nomination of the Republican presidential candidate, John McCain, backfired on him because of the attention it got. Appointing Sarah Palin as the vice presidential brought on much criticism because people were concerned about her becoming a political liability to the office if McCain was to win. Overall, the person that should be chosen to become the vice president, as demonstrated in the 2008 election, the vice president should be someone who is compatible with the president that does not cause too much controversy, and yet be able to perform as a president if something was to happen to him.
Electoral College: How does it affect the campaign and the outcome?
The Electoral College is the committee that runs the whole electoral process. In order for the party candidate to win, they must win the electoral votes of the states and get the majority. Each state, according to its population size gets a different amount of electoral votes. Due to large states having a lot of electoral votes, things called swing states came into existence. These are states that are not not completely determined on one political party. Some people criticize that the process un-democratize the whole electoral process because only the large swing states affect the outcome of the election. Some people believe that the popular vote is what decides the president, and not the electoral votes.
Campaign financing: What role does it play in the election?
Campaign finance refers to all the funds that are raise and spend for a candidate to be able to target an audience. Therefore, the more money a candidate acquires the more people they can influence. In the 2008 elections Democrats raised a little more than a billion dollars,$1,075 million dollars, almost double of what the Republicans raised,$605 million dollars. For the Democratic party the States of California and New York were the biggest financial contributors, while states like texas, virginia and florida supported the Republicans the most. The republican candidate, John McCain received $84.1 million in public funds for his general campaign and raised another $46.4 million for legal and accounting expenses. On the other hand, the Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama raised $745.7 million in private funds in order to use it in primary and general elections. Both candidates received money from other different sources such as the treasury which gave them $16.8 million. The Democrats and the Republicans used the majority of these funds in conventions and media such as television ads.
The media: Do they provide fair coverage of the candidates?
Media plays an important role in elections which is why it was an indispensable tool used by both political parties throughout the campaigning process. There is no limitations on how to spend this funds since it is an independent activity of each party. Membership organizations spent $18.1 million in communications, while both political groups reported to have spend $27.8 million on electioneering communications, which are broadcasts. The Democrat candidate, Barack Obama spent about $280 million on TV advertising, while McCain spend much less, $134 million. A great part of the money invested on these campaigns came from private sponsors, specially Barack Obama’s ones since he rejected the public funds that were offered to him.
Voter registration and voting procedures: How fair are they in various states?
The voting procedure was almost the same throughout all the fifty states, and continues to be, with some exceptions. Among the requirements every citizen had to follow in every state were: to be 18 years old, be a citizen of the United States, and a resident of that state.Regarding the voting process itself it varies a little, like in the state of Oregon where people get to send their ballot by mail instead of going to the voting center. Procedures like this one makes voting unfair for some people. However, in the majority of the states citizens have to go to their assign voting center in order to vote and follow the same rules.
Conclusion
From the information gathered, it can be understood that many different elements influence a presidential election. The selection process and the primary system are efficient ways to nominate candidates for the elections. They provide a system where people will pick the best suited candidate on a political party level, and then as a nation, the majority will pick the next president of the United States. The campaigning process is also distributed by the importance of each state, and the need of their electoral votes. Money is an important factor in the campaigns because in order to advertise and promote the candidate in the key states, money is everything. Unfortunately, due to this financial need, it is hard for all the candidates to get a fair coverage in the media since they cannot raise as much as the two major political parties. However, it is safe to say that campaign financing and the media are a couple of the key factors in the electoral process. Although each State has the power to make their own registration requirements and laws, it was surprising to find out that the requirements were similar all around the nation. Nevertheless, the general opinion was that the presidential election process is not the most adequate way to pick the best person suited for the job. The Electoral College’s system un-democratizes the whole political system that is implemented in the United States and the bipartisan system where the Democrats and Republicans monopolize the election is another way in which the election process needs to change. Our best suggestion would be that there should be a balance between the electoral votes and the popular votes because it does not make sense that a person should win the presidency when he got less votes than the other candidate. Another suggestion, although not seen as a problem, is the campaign financing. The fact that the two major political parties hold all the coverage of the media and get their “special attention” more than the other parties is the opposite of the definition of democracy. The other political parties should receive the same amount of money and chance to publicize their candidates and platforms. To sum it all up, the current presidential electoral process is efficient, but not completely democratic or economical. In spite of its flaws, we do not see it changing anytime soon because it would not work any other way in the way the government is set up in the United States.
U.S. Government Honors. 