On the Ballot
By Gilien Silsby, USC News
When USC College professors Ann Crigler and Edward McCaffery began
compiling a book on the politics and prospects of American election
reform, they used the 2000 presidential race as a starting point.
Little did they know that three years later, California’s controversial recall election would offer an interesting parallel.
The dozens of essays included in “Rethinking the Vote: The Politics and
Prospects of American Election Reform” (Oxford University Press, 2004)
are attempts to learn from the past and offer possible solutions for
the future.
Some 22 scholars—including USC College political scientist Jeb Barnes
and law professors Erwin Chemerinsky and Susan Estrich, who both have
joint appointments in the College—weighed in on the pitfalls and
problems of America’s current voting system. The contributors offer a
variety of viewpoints on the drama of Bush vs. Gore and the American
electoral system in general.
“Opinions range from those who want a truly participatory democracy in
which all votes count, to those who believe in a more minimalist
approach,” says Crigler, director of the Unruh Institute of Politics,
who edited the book with McCaffery and Marion R. Just, a professor at
Wellesley College.
Some contributors looked at the pressures on pollsters and media to call the 2000 presidential election quickly.
Another chapter in the book suggests that bias in voting results can
occur simply because of the way the candidates are listed on the ballot.
“The (California) recall election showed the promise and potential of
the vote—it showed people’s hunger for truly meaningful participation
in the process,” says Crigler.
“But our past—recent and distant—shows how fragile that hope can be. We
need to keep thinking and rethinking the proper means of and roles for
popular voting in democracy.”
|
