Louisiana elections ranked among the 'least democratic'Here's a new bottom-of-the-ladder ranking for
Louisiana: We are among the least democratic states in the nation in
conducting our congressional elections. That's the word from the Center
for Voting and Democracy. In its recently released "democracy index,"
the group ranked us 46th out of the 50 states.
Apparently, to score well in the ranking, a state must have a big voter turnout, and voters must be careful not to return too many incumbents to Congress. Looking at races for the U.S. House of Representatives from 1982 through 2004, the center concluded - in a report called "Dubious Democracy 2005" - that our incumbency rate is sky-high, and voter turnout was the lowest in the nation.
Whether re-election of incumbents makes a state undemocratic is debatable, but we have to admit that the state's perpetually low voter turnout stands between Louisiana and a truly democratic method of making public decisions. There are various definitions of democracy, but generally they all describe a form of government in which decisions are made with the direction of the majority of its citizenry through a fair elective process.
Seldom in Louisiana is a decision made by a majority of the citizens - or even a majority of registered voters. It is made by a majority of those who go to the polls, which is vastly different. In fact, the 39 percent turnout in the 2004 House election was pretty good in comparison to many other races. In the most recent presidential primary, only 10 percent of registered voters bothered to vote.
Perhaps citizens are tired of pre-packaged candidates who tell them what the polls say they want to hear. They may be tired of candidates who choose to make ugly attacks on opponents rather than promote their own issues and qualifications. They seem weary of debates that are less exciting and informative than quilting bees.
In a survey two years ago by the Council for a Better Louisiana, a nonprofit, good government group, 76 percent of voters surveyed said the value of state services they receive for the taxes they pay is fair to poor. Nearly half said corruption is so entrenched in Louisiana politics that a vote for change makes no difference.
In state races, people have listened to promises of change in election after election; yet have seen Louisiana remain at the bottom of the heap in terms of education, health care, employment, infrastructure and other vital categories.
Staying away from the polls, however, is not an answer to any of the issues. In fact, leaving decisions in the hands of a tiny percentage of the total population can worsen the problems. Good government happens when good people vote in an informed manner. The democratic process suffers when people decide it is not worth the trouble to go to the polls.
If you believe in democracy, demonstrate that belief in the next election.
Apparently, to score well in the ranking, a state must have a big voter turnout, and voters must be careful not to return too many incumbents to Congress. Looking at races for the U.S. House of Representatives from 1982 through 2004, the center concluded - in a report called "Dubious Democracy 2005" - that our incumbency rate is sky-high, and voter turnout was the lowest in the nation.
Whether re-election of incumbents makes a state undemocratic is debatable, but we have to admit that the state's perpetually low voter turnout stands between Louisiana and a truly democratic method of making public decisions. There are various definitions of democracy, but generally they all describe a form of government in which decisions are made with the direction of the majority of its citizenry through a fair elective process.
Seldom in Louisiana is a decision made by a majority of the citizens - or even a majority of registered voters. It is made by a majority of those who go to the polls, which is vastly different. In fact, the 39 percent turnout in the 2004 House election was pretty good in comparison to many other races. In the most recent presidential primary, only 10 percent of registered voters bothered to vote.
Perhaps citizens are tired of pre-packaged candidates who tell them what the polls say they want to hear. They may be tired of candidates who choose to make ugly attacks on opponents rather than promote their own issues and qualifications. They seem weary of debates that are less exciting and informative than quilting bees.
In a survey two years ago by the Council for a Better Louisiana, a nonprofit, good government group, 76 percent of voters surveyed said the value of state services they receive for the taxes they pay is fair to poor. Nearly half said corruption is so entrenched in Louisiana politics that a vote for change makes no difference.
In state races, people have listened to promises of change in election after election; yet have seen Louisiana remain at the bottom of the heap in terms of education, health care, employment, infrastructure and other vital categories.
Staying away from the polls, however, is not an answer to any of the issues. In fact, leaving decisions in the hands of a tiny percentage of the total population can worsen the problems. Good government happens when good people vote in an informed manner. The democratic process suffers when people decide it is not worth the trouble to go to the polls.
If you believe in democracy, demonstrate that belief in the next election.
Election Day '09 was a roller-coaster for election reformers. Instant runoff voting had a great night in Minnesota, where St. Paul voters chose to implement IRV for its city elections, and Minneapolis voters used IRV for the first time—with local media touting it as a big success. As the Star-Tribune noted in endorsing IRV for St. Paul, Tuesday’s elections give the Twin Cities a chance to show the whole state of Minnesota the benefits of adopting IRV. There were disappointments in Lowell and Pierce County too, but high-profile multi-candidate races in New Jersey and New York keep policymakers focused on ways to reform elections; the Baltimore Sun and Miami Herald were among many newspapers publishing commentary from FairVote board member and former presidential candidate John Anderson on how IRV can mitigate the problems of plurality elections.