Our Failing Democracy
Vox had an article about a gathering at Yale where some of the nation’s top political scientists discussed our failing democracy, the problems exacerbating its failure, and hopefully potential solutions. The results were not good.
According to Vox, “nearly everyone agreed: American democracy is eroding on multiple fronts — socially, culturally, and economically. The scholars pointed to breakdowns in social cohesion (meaning citizens are more fragmented than ever), the rise of tribalism, the erosion of democratic norms such as a commitment to rule of law, and a loss of faith in the electoral and economic systems as clear signs of democratic erosion”.
Various reasons for this decline were outlined. Nancy Bormeo opined that democratic institutions can be become separated from their citizenry, working only to benefit themselves rather than the country at large and eventually creating an angry and divided electorate. Adam Przeworski pointed to the loss of the social contract that allows cooperation and sacrifice for the general social good and often has meant that one generation of Americans made an effort to ensure the next had a better life. But decades of economic stagnation combined with increasing inequality has broken this compact. “64 percent of people in Europe believe their children will be worse off than they were; the number is 60 percent in America”. The end of this contract leads to an “every man for himself” attitude and the collapse of the political center.
Daniel Ziblatt spoke about the destruction of democratic and governing norms. “Dying democracies, he argued, are always preceded by the breaking of these unwritten rules.” The most blatant recent example of this was Merrick Garland’s stolen Supreme Court seat. And the Trump administration is just one enormous attack on those norms. Another point that Zinblatt made was also expanded on by Timur Kuran who talked about “intolerant communities”. This is the refusal of each group to accept the legitimacy of its opposition. “Each of these communities defines itself in terms of its opposition to the other. They live in different worlds, desire different things, and share almost nothing in common. There is no real basis for agreement and thus no reason to communicate. The practical consequence of this is a politics marred by tribalism” and is defined by our current political polarization.
Timothy Snyder had a far more interesting take which was in its own way related to the loss of the social compact. “His thesis was that you can tell a lot about the health of a democracy based on how its leaders — and citizens — orient themselves in time.” He described Trump and other Republicans’ desire to focus on a nostalgic, and somewhat mythical, past keeps the electorate from focusing on the future. “Trump has defined the problems in such a way that they can’t be solved. We can’t be young again. We can’t go backward in time. We can’t relive some lost golden age. So these voters are condemned to perpetual disappointment.”
Now I was not at the conference so I can’t give a critique of the emphasis that speakers put on particular issues. And I also can’t disagree with any of the points these learned scientists make. But I really think that there should have been a more laser-like focus on the clear structural problems in our democracy such as the Electoral College, the small and rural state bias of the US Senate, extreme gerrymandering, and voter suppression, issues I have focused on repeatedly.
The largest indicator of those failings is the fact that the winner of the popular vote in two of the last five Presidential elections did not, in fact, become President because of the anachronism of the Electoral College. According to current estimates, by 2040, just 30% of the population would live in states that have 70 votes in the US Senate, a filibuster proof margin. Extreme partisan gerrymandering further undermines a true democratic result. In 2012, Democrats in Wisconsin won 53% of the vote but won only 40% of the seats in the Wisconsin Assembly. In 2016, Democrats won 50% of the vote for the House of Representatives but ended up with 45% of the seats. And in 2018, it is estimated that Democrats could win 55% of the vote and still not obtain a majority in the House.
I believe that many of the manifestations of our failing democracy that these political scientists identified actually have their origins in these structural failures of our democracy. I know the founders feared the tyranny of the majority and created checks and balances and other protections for the minority. But for the last few decades, we have actually been suffering under the tyranny of the minority. On so many issues, there is broad agreement among the American public on both sides of the political spectrum about specific policies. But any action on those policies are constrained by a well-funded and organized minority.
As Sean Illing, the author of the Vox article summarized, “Something has cracked. Citizens have lost faith in the system. The social compact is broken. So now we’re left to stew in our racial and cultural resentments, which paved the way for a demagogue like Trump. Bottom line: I was already pretty cynical about the trajectory of American democracy when I arrived at the conference, and I left feeling justified in that cynicism. Our problems are deep and broad and stretch back decades, and the people who study democracy closest can only tell us what’s wrong. They can’t tell us what ought to be done.” A good starting point might be talking about how we can enact real electoral reform.
