A Dearth of Democratic Competition
Not a lot of true competition on my ballot in Alabama.
So, in looking at my sample ballot I note that I can vote for 21 offices and one constitutional amendment. However, only four of the races have more than one candidate. And, really, only the US House is competitive (and that’s because the state was forced to redraw House districts), and even then, it is a likely D win. The State Board of Education race is maybe quasi-competitive (but also in relative terms with the D the likely winner because of district lines).
The amendment reflects the super-weird Alabama state constitution that often asks the whole state to vote on hyper-local, and very specific, policy issues.
This isn’t exactly a ballot that reflects a healthy democracy, as most of it is just a pro forma exercise. We already know that the winners of the primary won office.
Part of it is that there are a number of offices that I would argue simply shouldn’t be elected (e.g., judges) or for whom a hearty debate over whether they should be elected (school boards, public service commission). My general view is that policy-specific boards should be appointed, but that’s not the point of this post.
Part of what I see before me is part of a very long history of poor competition at the state and local levels in Alabama. That is part of a general democratic deficit that is long-standing. Part of it, too, is that the way lines are drawn walls off voters and there is little reason for both parties to be healthy enough to compete.
Montgomery County is majority Black, and hence Democrats do better than in the state overall. But most of the judicial races are statewide, and hence the GOP dominates. When I moved to the state in the late 90s, Democrats were still one-party dominant at the state and local level, with the full switch not hitting until roughly 2010ish.
I will note that the state is majority Republican, so it is fully democratic for them to dominate statewide offices. But having so many uncontested elections speaks to a broader, unhealthy democratic environment. While I know that this can be blamed, in part, on the state Democratic Party, the reality is, as I have noted before, individual candidates, more than party apparatuses, drive elections in the United States. When there is little hope of access to office, parties wither and individuals choose not to run. Money does not flow to certain losers.
Part of the problem is that the state House and Senate districts are gerrymandering to help the GOP, meaning that the State Legislature is overly dominated by one party. This diminishes the legislature as an incubator for statewide candidates for the Democrats. While statewide, the ratio of Republicans to Democrats is close to 60:40, the State House of Representatives and State Senate are something like 75:25. In 2018, which I have handy, the specifics were as follows. The State Senate was 77.14% to 22.86% and the State House of 73.33% to 26.67%.
It’s a little surprising that there aren’t milktoast (milquetoast?) moderate parties that pop up locally in states where there is one party dominance. Presumably there are people who just like the status quo, and don’t want to go down the dominant party’s plan.
Just running for local offices, no big Mike Bloomberg national party that stands for nothing and wants the presidency, just smaller center-right parties in Republican states and center-not-quite-left parties in Democratic states.
It feels like a niche that is lacking, and which could be filled. It’s not like anyone else is running in half the races.
Both in Cowlitz County, where I moved upon returning from Korea, and Multnomah County, where I live now, all local offices and state-level judgeships are non-partisan. That condition doesn’t clarify anything. Additionally, I’ve seen appointment government at work in other places. I’m not persuaded that such systems are either better or worse, but I am persuaded (and have seen in real life) that only people from the “right” cohort ever get selected for office in those systems.
Color me skeptical about there being any “fix” to the problems we have with how we select leaders. Want better results? Find a way to cultivate better voters. (And, yeah, I get that’s not a practical answer, either. “We go to war with the army we have,” etc.)
I’m wondering a bit how elections worked in the Soviet Union and other communist countries.
Oh, there were plenty of elections, even in Stalin’s day. As I vaguely recall, most or all were for local and national soviets (aka councils) which had little if any power in any meaningful way. There was only one party, but “independents” were allowed to run.
In the end all power rested with the general secretary and the politburo, and such officials as they appointed in various regions and localities. Succession was upon death, with one coup for variety.
My ballot in the 4th Precinct, Makanda Township, Jackson County IL included incumbent Republican candidate Paul Jacobs running unopposed for the Illinois General Assembly. I did not vote for him. The only other unopposed candidate on my ballot was the incumbent Democrat running for the County Board seat representing my district. I voted for him.
All the other five federal, state and local contests included multiple candidates including Independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (Can’t wait to see how many votes he gets.)
I voted a straight Democratic ticket.
Once again the poll worker did not know what I was talking about when I asked for my receipt after I signed my registration card.
News Flash!
Trump lackey incumbent Republican Representative to The United States House,
Illinois District 12, Mike Bost might as well have run unopposed on my ballot. He has been declared winner by AP with 57% of the vote counted.
In the Puget Sound it is a one party DEM system, but we’re getting some odd results. I have 2 state reps (every 2 years) and the one I don’t like had opposition and got 68% of the vote – and she is banned by her caucus (fellow Dems) from being alone with Dem staffers (sort of like a no-contact order). The other I like and she ran unopposed but has 6.6% write-in. Huh? For my County Council the choice wss between 2 Dems (Top 2 system). The only local race I donated to ($35) the candidate I support is going to win (and I know him).
This feels worse than 2016.
Waking up and realizing that the US voted for the felon is really unbelievable and not in the best way.
I fear for Ukraine.
@Min: Sure, but only because it is worse.
@just nutha:
True. Though apparently most of the US doesn’t think so.