Voting and Elections in the U.S

The three goals of an ideal democracy have been addressed substantially differently in the categories of the presidential primary process, the presidential campaign financing process, and the Electoral College system. The first category to look at to see how well the three goals have been met is the presidential primary process, the presidential campaign, financing process, and the Electoral College system. The first category to look at to see how well the three goals have been met is the presidential primary process. How “fair to all” is the primary process? Something that should be addressed when looking at the primary process is which states have them first. Iowa and New Hampshire seem to get first dibs in the primary process. Now a primary is a election where registered voters usually from each party can choose a candidate they would like to run for office. Now seeing that this event is very significant especially when dealing with the presidential election it is less fair when states like New Hampshire and Iowa go first. New Hampshire is the first state to have there primary then Iowa, and then the other States come in. When New Hampshire and Iowa go first with the primaries most candidates and the parties pay less attention to other stat’s primaries leaving them out.

The presidential primary process can achieve this by front loading. Front loading is when states move there primaries to an earlier date. By doing this states can put their candidates out there, and raise more political awareness. This creates competition between candidates and states that help them get politically active. The third goal that is mentioned is to faithfully represent the views of the electorate. This goes back to Iowa and New Hampshire, and how they get more representation. To conclude for the presidential primary process it does not meet all of the goals for an ideal democracy.

The next category to evaluate how well these three goals have been met by the presidential campaign financing process has its potential. The McCain-Feingold Act in all fairness has limited how much a presidential candidate can spend on there campaign. On the other hand there may be some unfairness to campaign financing. This involves candidates spending their campaign money in the beginning compared towards the end like Kerry did in 2004 elections.

The next goal to evaluate is political competition. The competition can come when or if candidates decide to take matching funds. Matching funds are when candidates decide to fundraise and get donations of $250 from individuals. Then they can decide to take matching funds that match the donations. These goals of an ideal democracy seem to be met when looking at presidential campaign financing.

The third category to look at with these goals is the Electoral College System. The Electoral College system seems to be fair when looking at the voting process. In the Electoral College small states are fairly represented along with the bigger states. The minimum vote a small state receives in the Electoral College is 3.