Why American Elections Are Flawed (And How to Fix Them)

Brown Democracy Medal

by Pippa Norris

The flaws in the American electoral process have become more apparent over many years. The contemporary tipping point in public awareness occurred during the 2000 election count, but several major structural weaknesses exacerbated doubts in the 2016 campaign, worsening party divisions and further corroding public trust in the electoral process. It is impossible to fix a problem without understanding its nature. To gather independent evidence about the quality of elections around the world, the Electoral Integrity Project (EIP), an independent project with a research team based at Harvard and Sydney universities, was established in 2012. According to expert estimates developed by EIP, the 2012 and 2014 elections in the United States were the worst among all Western democracies. Without reform, these problems risk damaging the legitimacy of American elections―further weakening public confidence in the major political parties, Congress, and the US government, depressing voter turnout, and exacerbating the risks of contentious outcomes fought through court appeals and public protests. Why American Elections Are Flawed (and How to Fix Them) describes several major challenges observed during the 2016 US elections, including deepening party polarization over basic electoral procedures, the serious risks of hacking and altering official records, the consequences of deregulating campaign spending, and the lack of federal standards and professional practices in electoral management. Pippa Norris outlines the core concept and measure of electoral integrity, the key yardstick used by the EIP to evaluate free and fair elections. She compares cross-national and state-level evidence from expert and mass surveys to diagnose problems in American elections. She shows how these challenges could be addressed through several practical steps designed to improve American electoral procedures and practices. If implemented, the reforms recommended by the EIP will advance free and fair elections at home and abroad.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction

68 pages, Paperback

Published April 4, 2017

About the author

Pippa Norris is Associate Director (Research), and Lecturer, John F. Kennedy School of Government, at Harvard University in the USA.

Reviews

[Timur Markowitz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great analysis. Really well done

[Archived Account - Not Active · Rating 4 out of 5]

A concise and cohesive analysis. Split into five main sections, Norris describes how electoral integrity and public trust has been impacted by structural weaknesses in the polling process throughout the years, how electoral integrity is measured, what flaws our current system has, as well as which measures should be taken to promote effective electoral reform. I read it for my freshman political science seminar called Conflict & Cooperation in college.

[Alora · Rating 3 out of 5]

Helpful but wanted additional info

[Brandon · Rating 2 out of 5]

Short read, about the length of a pamphlet, took between 20-30 minutes. It is about what the title says but very light on details and analysis. Reads like an executive summary of a report that I would have rather seen.

The main metric it refers to (rating the integrity of elections/democracy) comes from the organization it is essentially written by, the Electoral Integrity Project. The author, Pippa Norris, is the director. Some citations came across as self-referential when the source was the Electoral Integrity Project.

There were some interesting points. The comparisons of various state electoral administrations (US to Sweden to UK) was informative. Two axes were used to describe the electoral programs of all countries, governmental vs independent agency and centralized vs localized agency. Norris offered that the US may have the worst in terms of electoral integrity, governmental and localized (decentralized), which offers multiple vectors of corruption (thru partisanship politicking, gerrymandering, inadequate oversight, lack of proper standards and enforcement to name a few) that many of us can easily recognize in the US.

I can't really recommend it as I had expected more analysis or case studies in regards to the issue. The content is more appropriate for a magazine article rather than a book sold in local bookstores. May be good for policy buffs.