First and foremost, thank you Markos, thank you kossers! Your hard work paid off.
I waited a few days to post this (1st diary), so as not to get in the way of the Get Out The Vote effort. I wrote it as a follow-up to some of Rachel Maddow’s comments this week: astutely comparing the long waiting lines to a poll tax, and making a parallel with another recent election close by in a country that faces many of the same challenges but none of the resulting problems: huge territory, regional and federal government issues, disparities in population densities from one area to the next. She was speaking of your neighbour Canada. Diaries here have often been a testimony of how difficult it has been for so many to manage to vote (mothers working double shifts on Tuesday, etc.). As Rachel said, in many cases it came down to having the right to vote only if you can afford to wait in line.
I do not mean to embark you on meaningless comparisons. I have a strong personal attachment to the US, and my family's history is linked to that of America. Additionally, the US races are watched carefully from abroad, because they have a high, global impact. But this time it was different. On Tuesday there was a buzz, on Wednesday there was joy, smiling faces, trust regained. Those who can remember such excitement about a US election from abroad are thinking back to the Kennedys. It has been truly inspirational the world over. I have been moved to tears by this community, by your fight to make it possible for a maximum of Americans to exercise their right to vote. I have often wished I could be there to help out.
When I read these diaries, articles, and watch shows that express such a variety of opinion, allow for extensive dialogue, and trigger such involvement and dedication at the personal level, I think "this is truly a great democracy". When I see long waiting lines and voter suppression, when I see how hard it is to actually vote, I think "this is supposed to be THE great democracy?" How can it be that long waiting lines at the poll and voter suppression are associated with unstable, emerging democracies, and... The US?
I feel this is very representative of the divide between the image the United States is disseminating within its boundaries and abroad (leading democracy, freedom, spreading democracy) and the on the ground reality we are sharply reminded of every 4 years (dysfunctional elections, suppressing the vote, destabilizing regions which in the end promotes fundamentalist regimes).
Concretely:
Whenever W said: "spread democracy",
people frowned: "wait a minute, didn't this guy steal an election?"
This divide explains a lot in terms of the United States’ image on the international stage. I know many of you are aware of that (See Bink's diary on a similar topic).
I’m sure many of you also feel that improving the electoral system and infrastructure must be a national priority, along with foreign policy, the economy and health care*.
The point here is absolutely not to criticize, but to be constructive (with all of the respect in the world, don’t you want what you love to improve, progress, function ever better each day?) In the words of Mayor Wilder (Richmond, VA), why not make voting an enjoyable experience?
I hope to bring some perspective to the debate with this diary and hope the comments provide a space for further discussion. I don't pretend to show anyone how it's done, there are no one-size-fits-all solutions. Each country has a different system, each need to find their own, and the most appropriate, customized system. But look around, and you will find ideas and examples of good practices, or case studies if you will.
Every election season, I read articles pondering what could, should, must be done to improve voter participation and the whole election mechanism. Then life goes on and the press, decision-makers and the public move on to other things. Besides, I understand that many have a greater interest in keeping the waiting lines long. But YOU, the voter, do not.
I live in a densely populated region (Europe) with relatively small countries very close to each other, so it is dense in every respect, and we are aware of the goings-on in the overall region, which implies many elections. Furthermore I work for an international NGO. I’ve been asking my colleagues and friends from many countries about their voting experience. The average estimated time they need to vote is between 15 and 30 minutes. Typically, voting will take about 15 minutes of my time on Election Day. I’ve never missed an election since I turned 18. We get final results a few hours after the polls close.
As a European, it shocks me most that such a huge effort is necessary to allow people to vote. I feel it is profoundly anti-democratic that voting becomes a herculean exercise encompassing so many challenges. It seems everything has been done to discourage You The People from participating.
Every 4 years we imagine that particular election was a bit of a f¤¤¤-up and suppose things will improve greatly next time. Because there is no way citizens or their representatives can accept such obvious voter suppression techniques in a stable democracy today. We have heard so many protest them in the past 8 years, from within the system.
It blows my mind that from where I am, I can get to any of the capital cities of neighbouring countries faster than some US citizen can vote, counting from the moment this citizen reached the waiting line at his or her poll. It takes us less time to get the election results, from when the polls close, than it does for some US citizens to cast a ballot. We are talking about all paper ballots, counted by hand, no absentee voting. And our systems are very far from perfect. But I think we cover the one absolute basic thing: making voting as straightforward as possible.
What I am saying is, It Can Be Done.
Over the past months, you all helped organize a widespread militant movement. You have questioned, vetted, informed, alerted, supported, fundraised, promoted... and I believe you have truly made a difference in this election. I also believe you can keep making a difference...
Improving the Election Process. Perhaps this could be Kossaks' next challenge?
One. I think we can agree that if there is one thing government can and should be responsible for, it is organizing elections and making sure all of the citizens it represents can participate in the process. It would make sense for the federal government to be involved. It would also make sense that elections be organized by a non-partisan system. Nothing is going to happen if YOU don’t get the word out to the persons representing YOU.
Two. I have no idea whether this is in fact feasible, but perhaps things would be a great deal easier if nationwide elections followed nationwide rules. One set of rules means less misinformation and more efficiency.
Three. Obviously the polling place grid needs to increase its coverage. This means more polls, with a lower fixed number of voter assignations per poll. More polls means more poll employees, more machines (or whatever system is used to cast votes), more infrastructure. (Some countries get around rising costs by working with a percentage of volunteers or a type of public service draft much like jury duty).
Four. Waiting lines and problems encountered varied from place to place. What are the issues in your State?
Five. Making Election Day a national holiday, or voting on week-ends when less people work is the suggestion that comes up the most often, and sounds reasonable enough.
Six. People with a good knowledge of the legal system need to get involved to target high impact actions: which representatives do we need to get in touch with? What are the legal options for a reform?
Seven. Remember you are the change you've been waiting for.
And that's just to make the polls accessible.
Sure there are other aspects to be discussed. For instance, perhaps the presidential elections should be about choosing representatives only, and not making local decisions about many other propositions that get lost in the noise and do not get the attention they deserve (like Prop 8 and so many others).
John Cleese suggested that not allowing TV adds, as is the case in the UK, lowers the smear levels. In France each and every candidate (and there are many) is allowed one add with strict regulations: all are the same length, all are played back to back during the same time slot. There is also a campaign black out 48 hours before the elections.
I don't know about that though, they seemed to do fine with smear campains before television too.
Every aspect is important, but I think it is worth focusing on a system that facilitates voter access, to begin with: improving access to the polls and making sure votes aren't stolen should be the first priority.
What are your thoughts?
Here is Rachel on long lines at the poll:
<iframe height="339" width="425" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/27508339#27508339" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>
* On the importance of health versus economy, check out this
fascinating TED Talk on development (best stats you've ever seen!). But that's a whole different diary.