The United States was built on the concept of government by the people and represents the  model of democracy. However, such concepts as government by the people have withered away to be nothing more than words.

Today, U.S. elections are plagued with low voter turn-out and little political knowledge

on behalf of voters.  Afterall, most Americans did not know what the electoral college

was prior to the presidential election of 2000. 

Politicians consistently espouse the significance of upholding our democratic values around the world. So what is the state of democracy in the U.S.?  Is it still government

by the people or has it morphed into something else? More importantly, do

Americans know what they want democracy to be, and is it there yet?   

Democracy is dynamic. 

The democracy that we know today emanated from citizens challenging the system and pushing for change.  At its core, democracy  is about narrowing the gap between citizens, democratic institutions, and political leaders. However, initially the gap was quite wide.

The Framers of the U.S. Constitution instituted procedures to curb popular influence by adopting the electoral college, as well as the election of Senators by state legislators.   While the electoral college remains an institutional feature, senators are now popularly elected. 

Of course, many groups were politically disenfranchised for much of U.S. history.  The political process was envisioned to be dominated by white, male, property owners.

However, the brave defiance of women, African  Americans, language minorities, and

young people made democracy the open process that it is today. When these groups

lacked the right to vote,  they used non-traditional forms of political activism such as

protesting and social movements, the primary means to get their voices heard.   As a result, more American citizens have the opportunity to participate in the traditional electoral process than at any other time in our

history. 

However, today almost half of American citizens do not vote or participate in state

and local elections (presumably local elections would have the most impact on

citizens). That is abysmal. Certainly something has disrupted the connection between

citizens and  the political process. 

Many have claimed that the growing distrust of government is a significant reason for the decline in participation.  Others argue that it not just a withdrawal from politics that is occurring but a withdrawal from civic life.  For instance, not only do people not vote, but they don't participate in other activities either. Television and the Internet have become a significant means of connecting with other people and it has certainly turned politics into more of a spectator sport as opposed to the participatory activity that it should be. 

Perhaps what is most ironic is that in this era of cable television and the Internet is  that citizens have more opportunities to be informed given the numerous outlets of information.  However, they are disinterested and more inclined to watch the latest reality television program.  

For years, scholars and pundits have lamented the decline in voter turn-out. Nonetheless, politicans get elected regardless of turnout numbers and our institutions continue to operate. The fact remains that those who are interested, informed, and care about elections vote while others choose not too.  

Why would we want uninformed and disinterested people participating in the process?   Perhaps that is not the right question to ask, rather, what has happened that we cannot engage those individuals to feel a part of the process? 

There are no easy answers to these questions.  Some have argued that the growing

levels of distrust of the government have made citizens opt out of the process

becoming more apathetic and distrusted. However, while there is growing distrust, Americans still have great faith in their democratic institutions. 

So, if Americans aren't voting, what are they doing?  

More American citizens are giving money to campaigns and joining organizations than any other period in our history. There's power in numbers and  American politicians certainly recognize the importance of appealing to organized, active collectives for votes and money. While many have criticized the influence of these organizations, if it wasn't for

democracy, these organizations would never be able to form and citizens would

be deprived of  another expression of their political voices. Nevertheless, this

certainly signals that the concept of democracy in the U.S. may be changing

before our eyes and is now quite reminiscent of our earliest democratic form, the elitist

democracy.

How are the consequences of  the aforementioned organized collectives becoming

more significant to the political process than the individual voters? Well, it

potentially reinforces apathy among the electorate for those individuals who feel they

cannot surmount the influence of such groups. Many simply do not understand why

individuals make a conscious choice not to vote. Afterall, voting is the simplest form of

participation, just some time before or after work to cast a ballot.  

While the ideal is to cast an informed vote, most are uninformed and rely on the party of

their candidate as a means to guide their vote choice rather than the policy

positions of the candidate. However, for many the costs of voting outweigh the benefits.  There is no guarantee that your candidate will win, or that he or she will adopt

policies in your interests. You may need to take time off from work, hire a

babysitter, etc. 

For those who feel powerless to effect change, what is the incentive to

cast a vote when the benefits are intangible?  Unfortunately, for minorities and

women who are disproportionately poor, uneducated, and unemployed the act of voting

can mean very little when one is concerned about paying the rent on time, finding a

new job, or putting food on the table. Generally, those who don't vote stand

to gain the least from voting.  Afterall, politicans are most attentive to

those who consistently participate, give to the campaigns, and are mobilized. 

While democracy is "government by the people,"  unfortunately it is those who

benefit the most from the system that keep democracy rolling while those who benefit

the least are rolled over. 

They cannot afford to be active members in interest groups and other influential organizations and therefore their voices are lost among the PACs, lobbyists, and mobilized membership of these collectives. 

In essence, voting is the only means of participation for these individuals

and yet when they feel their vote doesn't count or feel powerless to

influence the process than democracy has failed for these individuals. The lack of

tangible benefits from voting can reinforce a sense of  powerlessness and eventually

lead to apathy. Ironically, the very groups that had historically fought for the

right to vote (i.e., women, African Americans and minorities) are the same groups

that today have the lowest levels of turnout.  It almost seems that the popular

democracy that so many had fought for is now  an elitist democracy. The individuals who

stand to gain the most from the system actively participate while those

individuals who see fewer benefits do not see voting as a meaningful way to express their

concerns and lack  the resources  to participate in other ways.  The consequence?

Dropping out of the electorate as voters and having their voices silenced.

However, while we lament low voter turn-out and the influence of money and organizations, there are no mass movements decrying these facets of political life. Social

movements are virtually non-existent in the U.S. despite the fact that they

were so instrumental in protecting civil rights, civil liberties, women's rights, and closing the gap between citizens and the electoral process. 

Change emanates from the people not the institutions.  

Could this mean that Americans are actually quite satisfied with the state of democracy?  Or are they so uninformed that they don't realize the consequences of their inactivity on policy and elected leadership?  

Many have made attempts to reform our system by calling for the abolishment of the electoral college and its replacing with a semi-proportional system, campaign finance reform, simplified voter registration, allowing convicted felons to vote, and  electronic voting. All in an effort to achieve the ideals of democracy. 

There is certainly no shortage of ideas, but while reform is possible, it is difficult and again requires an active collective, and resources beyond what is required for voting. However, if voters see little to be gained from voting, why on earth would they attempt to change the electoral system or support campaign finance reform?  

As the United States attempts to bring democracy to all corners of the globe it appears

that democracy is broken within in its own borders.  The very groups that fought for the right to vote are still under-represented in legislative institutions and positions of political decision-making.  With each election year, we wonder what will voter turn-out be like?Politicians and organizations aggressively go after voters with slick campaign appeals.  So what happens after election day? 

Elections help to stimulate political interest but do little to sustain that interest after

the election is over with.   Reviving the political activity of the American electorate

will take more than making voting or registration easier.  It will mean showing citizens the relevance of  being politically informed.  For those who lack resources, it will mean showing them they have a stake in the process by reconnecting people to their community institutions and organizations. It will mean making the act of voting relevant to voters and not just to the electoral process. 

Another presidential year is upon us in the United States and this election promises

to be one of the most contentious and significant elections in nearly four decades. The War in Iraq and the War on Terrorism have raised the level of interest

and consciousness among Americans on issues of foreign affairs. Second, the

sluggish economy and unemployment have Americans concerned and fearful of what their

personal future holds. Finally, the extraordinary presidential election in 2000 still resonates as  George W. Bush won the presidency with a majority of the electoral

college votes while failing to win the popular vote. In fact, this last event should have shaken every American's definitive view of democracy.  

Instead, the focus shifted to antiquated voting technology and the butterfly ballot- not

the fact that most Americans were unaware of the electoral college and its role

in the process. Therefore,  Americans did not even have the information to question

if the electoral college was still necessary and relevant to our democracy. Very

few people know that it was adopted to curb the influence of common people rather

than incorporate that influence. 

Democracy is evolving  here in the United States.  Although we attempt to achieve the ideal of government by people, we are't there yet. We believe this in theory, but

have failed to achieve it by practice. In order to fully be a government by the people, Americans will need to reclaim their position in the political process as individual voters. 

If the issues mentioned above aren't enough to reawaken that spirit, than democracy is in real trouble.