On Election and Democracy

For months, everyone has been hot under the collar about the Presidential election.  Everyone has an opinion about the candidates, and no one holds these opinions lightly.  My concern is not about which candidate becomes our next President, but about our election process and the effects that it has on our republic.

We aspire to be a nation governed by democratic principles.  Although it’s been more than thirty years since I’ve had a political science class, and I do not claim to be an expert on the subject, I understand democracy to be built upon three principles.  We agree on two, but have lost sight of the third.

1. We agree that every citizen is entitled to vote (with some restrictions, but far fewer than in decades or centuries past).

 

2. We agree on the concept of “majority rule:” the candidate or the proposal that receives the most votes is the winner (again, with some exceptions such as the electoral college or initiatives that require a super-majority).

3. We have forgotten, however, that in a democracy, the rights of the minority are protected.  The democratic principle of majority rule does not imply a tyranny of the majority.  But this seems to be the case in our republic.  For example, consider some of our deepest “red” and “blue” states such as Texas or California.  In the last five election cycles, the winning candidate never got more than 61% of the vote in these states.  That’s a 22 point victory, which anyone would consider to be decisive.  However, it also means that 39% of the voters did not vote for the winner.  After the election, this minority (roughly two of every five citizens) has no voice or influence in their own governance.  Republicans in Texas can ignore Democrats with impunity and still advance their agenda, and Democrats can do the same thing to Republicans in California.   We find this reality not only deep red and blue states such as these, also in “battleground” states where the majority holds the slimmest of leads. But that is all they need to foist their will upon everyone else.

Protecting the rights of the minority in a democracy has more to do with attitude than it does with policies such as super-majorities and the electoral college (which exist for this precise reason).  I’m a Presbyterian, and according to the fundamental governing principles of our church “a majority shall govern,” but we recognize that “men of good characters and principles may differ. And in all these we think it the duty both of private Christians and societies to exercise mutual forbearance toward each other.”  Incidentally, our nation’s founders referred to these Presbyterian principles of government when they drafted our Constitution.  In this case, what’s good for Presbyterians is good for all Americans.  Unfortunately, we see precious little “mutual forbearance” in political discourse these days.  And the negative campaigning that has taken over our elections is the antithesis of the notion that those with whom we differ are nonetheless people of “good characters and principles.”

Whichever way the election turns out, huge numbers of people in our nation will resent and even despise our new President.  If recent history is any indication, he or she will likely work with his or her political party to push through their proposals with no regard for the other party.  And officeholders of the other party will do all they can to obstruct these proposals – even if they agree with them.  For the first time in generations, we even hear talk of rebellion and violence.  This is what happens in a democracy when the silenced minority has no way to participate meaningfully in their own governance.

In the past, I wanted a divided government.  If one party controlled the Presidency and the Senate, for example, I wanted the other party to control the House.  I did not want my state’s governor and senators all to come from the same party.  In these situations, our political leaders would be forced to work with each other and reach an acceptable middle ground.  This protected our nation from the excesses of either political agenda.  My favorite political animals were neither the elephant nor the donkey, but rinos (“Republicans in name only”) and Blue Dogs (Democrats who refused to follow their party’s leadership).  But today, rhinos and blue dogs are nearly extinct in the menagerie of Capitol Hill, and the middle ground where majorities and minorities meet and work together has become a wasteland.

In this election, I care less about who wins than I do about the majority and minority finding a way to govern together.  If they do not, there are no winners.