Monacelli: Opinion polls illustrate need for electoral reform

Officially, the recession is over, according to some relatively well-off academics at least. Yet a recent Gallup poll reported 80 percent of Americans believe we are still in recession and 61 percent think economic conditions are getting worse in spite of reported economic growth.

This should not be surprising if you take into account that unemployment, including underemployed and those who have stopped looking for work, remains at about 16 percent. Additionally, wages are failing to keep up with the rate of inflation, and household income actually fell 6.7 percent in the two years after the recession while it only fell 3.2 percent during the 2007-09 recession

Such economic conditions are bound to spur discontent, and recent polls reflect this. A series of Gallup polls report that Obama's approval rating is at a term low of 41 percent while a massive 81 percent are dissatisfied with the way the country is being governed, and less than 30 percent approve of the job both parties are doing in Congress. The parties are also doing a poor job representing public opinion, with an overwhelming 77 percent saying they would like government to follow public opinion more closely.

In fact, some Americans believe that the current two-party system is doing such a poor job of representing them that 52 percent believe we need a third party. But as I argued in my previous column, voting third party in an election like 2012 would be disadvantageous if you lean to the left; it could potentially serve as a vote for the party you disagree with the most. Why? Consider our voting system.

The United States primarily utilizes the first-past-the-post system, also known more commonly as winner-takes-all. In this system, the candidate with the most votes in a single-member district is declared the winner (a single-member district simply means only one candidate or party can gain representation in the district). This system increases the spoiler effect. For example, enough liberals voted for the Green Party candidate in the 2000 election to deprive Al Gore of enough votes to hand George W. Bush the presidency, ‘spoiling' the election. In the end, polls showed that Green Party voters would have much preferred Al Gore as their president despite some disagreement. Thus, it can make strategic sense to vote for the lesser of two evils regardless of your true preferences.

On top of this, our current system gives substantial power to mass media in determining which candidates are likely to win. While the media isn't necessarily a kingmaker, it can easily marginalize a candidate. Consider the media's treatment of Ron Paul in spite of his straw poll victories. The truth of the matter is that if CNN, FOX and The New York Times treat him like he is an irrelevant old crazy, much of America may treat him as such, even if polls and his policy stances show reason to take him seriously.

Such a system is clearly perturbed. Yet if we were to change our voting system, the barriers to entry faced by third-party candidates could be significantly reduced, and voters would have more incentive to vote on principle rather than strategically. Two systems come to mind, although they are by no means the only alternatives.

In a proportional system, the proportion of the total votes a third-party candidate receives would equate into a proportion of representation in the legislature. In a preferential system, single-member districts remain, but voters number their preferences on a ballot so that if their preferred candidate doesn't end up being one of the top two candidates, the vote would be counted toward one of the lower preferences, creating a sort of instant run-off. In either system, the spoiler effect and incentives to vote strategically are reduced, and voting on principle becomes more attractive.

If polls are to be trusted, it can be inferred that the winner-takes-all system has failed in the eyes of the public. The system distorts voter behavior and helps to promote a two-party monopoly on politics, which many are unhappy with.

Reform is necessary, and either of these alternative systems appear preferable if we desire better representation from our elected officials.

Steven Monacelli is a Communication junior.

He can be reached at StevenMonacelli2013@u.northwestern.edu.