Recently The Eagle conducted an unscientific poll on www.TheEagleOnline.com asking students their opinion on the need for election reform. The results showed that, overall, students are unsatisfied with the election process and think it should be more representative.
After election controversies such as those in the 2000 elections and the allegations of voter fraud in Ohio in this recently concluded 2004 election, who is not unsatisfied with the process?
In the 2000 election, votes were counted and recounted, and lawyers, not politicians, ruled the election process. Now, despite the conclusion of the elections, rumors of voter fraud are abundant. What is it about this process that invites so much controversy?
The very nature of the election process often comes under scrutiny with disagreements over the Electoral College. Many people object to the Electoral College, as they claim is deprives half the state of its votes if the state goes the other way. Others stand by the established process, asserting that it is the best way to elect a president with minimal controversy and ensure that voters from rural areas still matter.
These local feelings are reflected on a national level by recent proposed bills in several states that would split the electoral votes down the vote margins, allowing a state to go more than one direction. Though no such bills passed, they indicate the concern felt about the election process.
Another aspect of the election process that many feel demands reform is that of the campaigning itself. The year-long, exhaustive expenditures, speeches, rallies, mudslinging, commercials and spin are overkill. The candidates could save so much money and time if they campaigned only half the time.
Also, the current president could spend more of his time and concentration on the country's well-being rather then a bid for re-election. If the candidates spent less time campaigning, there would also be less opportunity for each side to put its "spin" on national issues and more time to debate the issues themselves and how to best serve the country.
The process shouldn't deprive the nation of its president and thousands of dollars that are spent on annoying and insulting commercials.
Also, primaries could be held more closely together in terms of time. As it is now, the states that vote in April have a lower turnout, likely because they think it is decided by that time.
America is the greatest experiment in government, and it has been a success for the last 200 years. Yet just because it works does not mean it cannot be improved through reform.
