U.S. Democracy, Federalism, and Presidential Elections

Representative Democracy and the Electorate

The United States operates as an indirect, or representative, democracy, meaning that a select group is elected by the whole to serve as representatives while attending to public matters. This is in contrast to a direct democracy, which holds that all eligible members of a society can personally direct public affairs. This distinction is often overlooked by most Americans, who believe that the term "democracy" carries no qualifications.

In order to fully grasp American government, it is essential to understand that the Framers of the Constitution referred to it as republican in form. Their intention was to have representatives direct government operations — that is, voters select representatives who in turn carry out government business. The reasons for this procedure are manifold. Most notably, the Framers foresaw the electorate making poor decisions based on transitory emotions, thereby leading the country in an unwise direction. Given such predispositions, the Framers felt that minority views were susceptible to repression, a circumstance running counter to liberty. Naturally, the founders of the United States emphatically opposed such infringement. Limitations on an electorate's time, interest, and expertise make participatory democracy impractical. Additionally, the Framers recognized the nation's size as a barrier to direct democracy.

It follows logically that during the formative stages of the United States, the range of elective offices was restricted. Direct elections occurred for positions in the House of Representatives. In contrast, Senatorial and Presidential officers were indirectly chosen by legislatures. Currently, Senators are elected by voters from their respective states, while the electorate indirectly chooses the President by way of the Electoral College.

When discussing elective offices, it is important to address exactly who does the electing. The Framers, by explicitly stating it in the Constitution, gave the states domain over suffrage. Initially, eligible voters were white male landholders or taxpayers. Expansion of the electorate began in the 1800s when religious qualifications were abandoned. By mid-century, property and tax qualifications had also disappeared. After the Civil War, with the adoption of the 15th Amendment, citizens could not be refused voting privileges because of race or color. More voters were subsequently included with passage of the 19th Amendment, which prohibited voting denials based on sex. The Civil Rights Acts encouraged more minority voters to participate. The 23rd Amendment granted suffrage rights to citizens of the District of Columbia, while the 24th Amendment eliminated poll taxes. Finally, the 26th Amendment of 1971 proclaimed eighteen the minimum voting age. Interestingly, what began within the realm of the states has largely come under the jurisdiction of the Constitution.

Expansion of Suffrage and Voter Turnout

Having outlined the development of the electorate, one would expect higher voter turnout than what actually exists. There are numerous reasons for nonvoting. Those besieged by illness or physical limitations constitute a portion of nonvoters. Unexpected travel, cumbersome election procedures, and informal discrimination also negatively influence participation. Alienation — a mistrust of political procedures — is another motive why some decline to vote. Some citizens fail to perceive political efficacy. Another group does not acknowledge a need to vote, believing that government already handles affairs competently. Despite all these explanations, there exists a more prevalent one: apathy. The majority of nonvoters simply do not care about politicians or government matters; family, church, and work hold more importance than civic participation.

Several approaches can be taken to bolster voter turnout. Perhaps the most important and obvious solution is to register more voters. The motor-voter bill has attempted to serve such an end. Ultimately, however, it is the individual who determines his or her level of civic responsiveness.

Tension between national and state government has existed since the creation of this country. The idea of American federalism emerged from both experience and necessity. It was embedded in the struggle between the colonies and England. Colonial issues could never be effectively and efficiently addressed by a remote authority — namely the Crown. Federalism developed out of necessity as prominent colonists recognized a need for some centralized control while maintaining the integrity of individual states.

American Federalism and the Division of Powers

The Articles of Confederation attempted to balance the powers of local and national government. They allowed the national government to coin money, manage the post office, declare peace, and select crucial military officials. However, the Articles of Confederation were lacking in many respects. The national government was not given power to tax. Additionally, state and foreign trade were not under its jurisdiction. Consent from nine of thirteen states was required to pass legislation, and amendments were approved only with unanimous consent. Each state, regardless of its population, had only one delegate representing one vote. No national court system was established, and perhaps most importantly, there existed no power to enforce the provisions set forth. With such intrinsic weaknesses, the Articles of Confederation's authority was not far-reaching.

The Constitution further delineated the domains of national and state government. Neither level acting alone can change the division of powers prescribed by the Constitution. To guarantee this, the Framers declared the Constitution the supreme law of the United States, meaning that neither national nor state government can violate its stipulations.