Social Research and Elections

¶ … Electoral Rules and Socio-Economic Changes on Elections and Winners Thereof One should never be deceived to think or imagine that electoral rules are mere formalities. These rules have a major influence on the choices that voters make during an election in a democratic set up. Electoral rules can be defined as a set of rules that determine who votes, who vies and how votes are cast for representation at the various levels and how such votes are translated to electoral seats in such assemblies.

Therefore, it is clear from the definition that electoral rules and systems are only part of a wider structure commonly referred to as electoral regulations. Electoral systems discussions tend to exclude other aspects such as the right to vote, transparency and fairness elements (Vampa). Voting behavior and attitudes are influenced by socio-economic factors. Therefore, social groups exhibit differences in voting patterns. Some patterns are age-old but some reflect more recent developments.

Some of the most conspicuous factors that have played part in recent elections include social, class, race, ethnicity, religion, gender, region, age, marital status, public policy orientation, government performance evaluation and perceptions. Indeed, socio economic factors affect the level of voter apathy (Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan). Can Election (Electoral) Rules and Socioeconomic changes make a difference in who wins and what policies are more likely to be adopted? In Htun and Powel's view, electoral bodies are not the panacea for consolidating democratic governance but they are critical.

The analysts argue that without rules to govern elections, the concept of representative democracy is not sustainable. It is the rules that shape the brand of democracy that evolves. Such rules help to determine whether the relevant considerations have been included in making decisions, nature of government and accountability options that the public can hold the government with. The growth of sustainable democracy is therefore hinged on outcomes. The authors, further, postulate that electoral rules determine the policies that are likely to be used.

Examples include policies that influence the inclusion of minorities and women. The structure of the ballot, for instance, influences the extent of political competition between and within political parties. Legislative behavior with regard to inclination to promote the interests of individual political actors versus the collective wellbeing of parties is also influenced by the structure of the ballot. Electoral rules provide the balance between promoting personal interests of politicians and the interest of political parties.

The rules are, therefore, closely linked to the redistribution and regulation patterns; more so in advanced democratic societies. The issue on who really benefits from what rules is determined by whether scholars understand the depth of such aspects as geography, social class dynamics, and economy, access to medical care, rents and similar amenities. Historical accounts have demonstrated from experience that the views presented by philosophers have yielded long-term political betterment. Institutional innovations can also bolster the effectiveness of existing political systems.

Education is the single most influential factor as far as voter turnout is concerned. Educated people are more likely to vote; hence influence who is voted in and the policies that are likely to be adopted. Education helps people understand how the action of voting is linked to the realities of everyday life. Gender aspects also feature. As women acquire education, they participate in electoral processes and consequently create some amount of awareness in their peers of the issues that affect them as a special group.

The electoral system is living evidence of how socio-economic changes affect elections. For instance, The.