AMERICAN DEMOCRACY AT THE BREAKING POINT

Our deeply divided country can agree on one fact. The American political system is dysfunctional. The basic responsibilities of government are not working to provide legislative solutions to important problems. The chronic dilemmas of deficits, climate change, immigration, gun control and inequality receive little attention. It is unbelievable that in 2023, Congress only passed 27 bills compared to the 10-year average of 391 legislative measures.

To explain how our democratic system has reached this impasse, political scientists have studied the changing composition of the American people, what provisions continue to work in our Constitution and the outdated Constitutional provisions for electing presidents and senators. This commentary will review these findings.

What is pluralism? According to constitutionus.com, “Pluralism is the idea that citizens of different backgrounds can coexist in society even though they have different political opinions. Pluralists believe that a nation benefits from citizens with different beliefs equally participating in the same society.”

Who are the American people? For much of the 18th and 19th centuries, pluralism was not a political concern. The “typical American” was Male, White, Anglo-Saxon, and Protestant. Disenfranchised Native Americans and enslaved Africans were not a challenge to the system.  By the mid-to-late 19th century, Southern European immigration changed the composition of the American people. The Fourteenth Amendment granted four million African Americans their citizenship. In 1920, women gained the right to vote.

Today, America has numerous interest groups seeking a voice in government. Unfortunately, a conservative white minority now elects Congressional Representatives who refuse to consider the positions of others. Democracy and pluralism are being tested by a fractious, partisan divide.

How does our Constitution embody pluralism? James Madison argued in favor of adding pluralism to the Constitution in his ‘Number Ten” Federalist Paper. Madison pointed out that it was important for different political factions to tolerate each other and that no minority should be shut out of government. The political commentator, David French, summarizes Madison’s position as follows: “He said, what you essentially need to do is to dilute the disruptive power of faction by allowing factions to bloom. In other words, you don’t have to defeat or suppress another person to live according to your core values.”

What specific measures does the Constitution contain to protect pluralism in America? The Bill of Rights and the Civil War Amendments to the Constitutions are the baseline rights that all Americans enjoy. These rights cannot be taken away by losing an election or by living in a community hostile to one’s views.

The Constitution also favored the pluralist model of democracy by dividing power between the three branches of government including an independent judiciary. Competing interests have the opportunity to advocate for their own causes and values. However, to resolve disagreements and to respect diversity of beliefs in a pluralist society, compromise is essential.

What went wrong? Ironically, certain provisions in the Constitution have had the unintended effect of thwarting the will of an expanding multicultural majority in favor of a shrinking rural white minority. These outdated provisions have given an unyielding minority the means to paralyze government unless their demands are met.

The Electoral College. At the original Constitutional Convention, the compromise to elect the president was the Electoral College. Under this unique but now outdated system, every state had input into the electoral process rather than permitting the popular vote to elect the president.

The Electoral College system allows a candidate with fewer popular votes to win the presidency. George W. Bush in 2000 and Donald Trump in 2016 were both elected while losing the popular vote.  The more divided the country becomes, the greater likelihood that the Electoral College will defeat the will of the majority and elect a president who is supported by an uncompromising minority.

The U.S. Senate. The U.S. Senate provides an unfair advantage to the conservative white minority. The 40 million people who live in the 22 smallest, more rural states get 44 senators to represent them. The 40 million people living in liberal California get two senators. Moreover, the filibuster in the senate, which requires a supermajority of 60 votes to pass legislation, permits the white minority to block measures supported by the multicultural majority.

The Supreme Court.  The conservative Supreme Court with its judicial review and its majority of lifetime judges has consistently shown little judicial restraint in siding with the white minority. In recent polls, more than half the nation disapproves of how the court does its job.

What can be done? In the new book, Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point, it is argued that that other democracies, with constitutions modeled on our own, have abolished indirect voting like the Electoral College and other constitutional measures that unnecessarily favor minorities that are unwilling to compromise.

The authors, Harvard professors Daniel Ziblatt and Stephen Levitsky, fear that the Republican Party “has turned into a refuge of whites who fear loss of status and power due to the U.S. advance toward multiracial diversity.” They believe that Republicans are relying on outdated constitutional provisions that permit an unyielding minority to stay in power.

Amending our Constitution is the obvious solution. Norway has modified its founding document 316 times to achieve a modern, workable government. In the United States, the abusive rule of the few demands that the majority consider similar action to restore pluralism and compromise to our political system.