Now as well as Then: Questioning US democracy

I HAVE often declared my lack of faith in the first-past the-post electoral system. It is not truly democratic, since it can be greatly influenced by big money, constituencies can be gerrymandered, and there is invariably less than a desirable turn out on Election Day.

Having said that, proportional systems, while being fairer, are not necessarily perfect. Democracy is more than fair elections. It is also a matter of whether the populace is governed fairly and whether they have any redress when they are unfairly treated.

The USA often talks about exporting democracy, but their elections are becoming less than democratic, despite the statement of Ted Cruz to the effect that part of the system was democracy. To begin with, there has been gross gerrymandering to create safe seats, especially in Republican-governed states. Additionally, several states on the pretence that they are trying to avoid corruption at the voting booth, have instituted voter ID laws that make it particularly difficult for poor people, old people and students to vote. In view of the fact that there has hardly ever been any election fraud in any state outside  of Louisiana, this is clearly an effort to restrict voting. In a true democracy, one would be trying to enlarge the voting community, not restrict it.

Donald Trump has been raving about the Republican electoral system at the Primary level. He claims it is rigged. What he is complaining about is that in certain states, there is no vote of any sort. Delegates, which should be chosen as a result of a vote, are simply selected. It is the system which Ted Cruz dubbed democratic.

Additionally, a bar is set for the winning candidate to cross in terms of delegates won. If that numerical bar is not crossed, at the Convention held at the end of the Primaries, there is no guarantee that the candidates with the most votes will be selected as the Republican nominee to run in the national election. If that happens on this occasion, there is likely to be a bassa bassa.

Additionally, if one takes a state like Pennsylvania, one realises that the system is not only complicated, but that it is geared to the proposition that the ordinary voter will not have the final say. On  the Republican side, the state has 73 delegates. Only 17 of these automatically go to the Republican candidate who wins the most votes. The remainder are what are called unbound delegates, who can later turn up at the Convention where the Republican candidate is chosen and vote for anyone.

The Democrat side of the Primary is not without flaws either. There is universal voting or caucusing from which the competitors are awarded delegates. However, apart from these delegates, there are super delegates. These are Party members in office. In other words, elected officials like Congressmen or women, mayors, etc., have a second vote. It follows the old Guyanese rule that “all o’ we is one, but some o’ we is two”.

What is even more fascinating is that US citizens do not elect their President. This is done by a College of Electors. Al Gore won more of the popular vote than George W Bush in 1999. The founding fathers decided that large states should not be in a position to dominate smaller states. Thus, each state elects two senators to send to Congress.

Additionally, small states like Delaware or Vermont will have at least two electors, while New York will have only 54. While this seems like a lot, the population of New York is more than 27 times that of Vermont. There is a popular vote within each state; the winning candidate then receives all the Electoral College votes from that state, even if the winning margin is 100 votes in a state of 10 million voters.

It is thus strange that in a country where democratic principles are shrinking, and where gridlock has become the norm in place of the give and take anticipated in any democracy, that there should be talk of exporting democracy.

Nonetheless, outside of the area of elections, there are some positive signs of democracy. There is a “free” press, which can say anything its bosses allow it to say. The Defamation Law is not one where one is assumed guilty until proven innocent, the Media are much less afraid of a libel suit than they are here in Barbados, for instance.

Finally, there is a Freedom of Information Law, which is a guarantee of access to information vital to democratic process, including inhibiting corruption, and the ability of the ordinary citizen to monitor what Government is actually doing.

Democracy is a journey we have undertaken from a position of conflict. Do not for one moment believe that the Greeks were the first democrats. Athens, with its exclusion of non-citizens, women and slaves from the vote, was more like apartheid South Africa than anything we would call democracy today. There was something the West glories in calling primitive democracy. It existed all over Africa. The nation was divided up at the most basic level into extended families. There was in all cases a family elder. Then there were villages and districts all with the same structure. The elders from this level formed the National Council.

In spite of what one has been taught to believe, the traditional Paramount Chief not only took advice from this Council, but also did not dare go against the will of the Council. Among the Yoruba, the Oni had to obey his Council. Major disagreement meant that they would send him a pigeon’s egg, indicating that he should commit suicide or leave the land. He could leave the land, since in Africa at that time one was free to migrate wherever. But democratic justice had been served.