The Marginalization of Minority Groups in The Electoral System

The pluralist framework claims an “if-then” relationship that many might criticize as unrealistic. However the unrealistic “if-then” relation that the Pluralist Model generates becomes more viable and realistic as minorities are incorporated into institutions they were once denied physical entrance. This framework argues that if citizens participate in the political process of voting in different institutions, then the political system will reflect the electoral and policy outcomes favored by participants in a particular institution; this is the “if-then” relationship of the pluralist model (Lecture 6: “Models of Minority Exclusion”). Furthermore, it argues that there are many institutions and that different groups have access to a variety of institutions; if one ethnic group has been blocked form an institution, it can always access a different one. It assumes that every ethnic group has equal access to a political process but not every group will win all the times thus generating competition (Shaw et al., 2015). A democracy means that the majority wins and this does not mean white always wins as we have seen minorities come first in the last past years.

Voters Identification law may suppress minority voting and it may not suppress minority voting. We have so many different races that enter this country with permission and without. The laws for visiting or becoming a legal resident in this country is complicated especially because of the terrorist attacks. Identification laws are necessary in my opinion. It helps identify people, most importantly it helps to decrease any fraudulent activities in this country. I can say if it has anything to do with racial and ethnic minorities, maybe it’s a coincidence that majority of African Americans and Hispanic have less access to photo IDs, some of us are not legal citizens, or maybe not. The law complicates everything in general for good reasons so they feel. I can understand what the research and studies demonstrates, about the decrease in minority audience and increase Republican Party turnouts. I do believe if you have a higher mindset you can attain all things that seem impossible. I know firsthand how difficult it is for African Americans to register to vote without an ID, the law won’t even to let you register if its expired. So what the law has gotten strict, so what, that should motivate African Americans and other races in this country to push through any obstructions to get an ID so they can be apart in making changes in this society. I know African Americans went through what may have seem like Hell but they overcame it and contribute to adding Amendments, why go through

During the course of the past few decades, the United States of America faced hundreds of issues that impact the nation’s view of leadership. Some people of the United States believe that the issues that face America involves those in office, while others believe that the issue is structural. In the case of America today, there is a momentous structural difficulty in our voting system. Furthermore, the most distinct problem that the United States handles today is gerrymandering. Throughout this essay, it will be made clear that gerrymandering is the leading problem facing America today because it harms the equality of citizens.

Every country differs in their preference of political system to govern their countries. For democratic countries, two possible choices of governing are the presidential system and the parliamentary system. Since both the presidential and the parliamentary systems have their own strengths and weaknesses, many scholars have examined these two forms of government, and debate on which political system is more successful in governance. In this paper, I will first provide a detailed analysis of both the parliamentary and the presidential system. I will also evaluate each system’s strengths and weaknesses, addressing any differences as well as any commonalities. Finally, I will conclude by using historical examples to analyze and support the

Two-tiered pluralism differs from pluralism because of the effect it has upon the minority groups of the nation. While there is an equal legal backing for all racial and ethnic communities, minorities are still undermined by the system thus becoming segregated. Moreover in politics, minority groups tend to be under seclusion even though the current enacted laws grant equality at all stages. The amount of resources given to minorities are very different to elites leading to the practices and outcomes to be unequal (Lecture 6). Pluralism is very different from the two-tiered pluralism framework as it focuses upon group-based competition and that everyone has equal opportunities

The most important issue in relation to the Canadian electoral process is the debate over whether or not the state should implement electoral reform for federal elections. It is my stance that replacing the Single Member Plurality system (SMP) with the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) is undeniably in the best interest of Canadians, and I will attempt to prove this by contrasting The Limits: Electoral Systems and Electoral Reform - Or How I Came to Love SMP by Christopher Kam, who believes in the current SMP system, and Getting What You Vote For by John Hiemstra, who pushes for a change in favour of the MMP system. This paper will conclude with further critical analysis, as well as my justified stance the MMP system is clearly superior.

Ever since the advent of democratic systems of political decision-making in Ancient Greece, one of the primary concerns about democratic functioning has been the principle of majority rule. Whether a majoritarian system is divisive in its essence, paves the way for demagoguery, or obstructs minority groups from having a fair say in public affairs, criticisms of majority rule have and still persist nowadays. Indeed, notorious political figures such as Hamilton, Madison or Mill expressed concerns about the potential threat of a tyranny of the majority which would infringe on citizens’ fundamental rights. Moreover and recently, the outcome of the Brexit referendum has renewed the debate around majority rule and its flaws. However, within the context of the contemporary world in which democracy prevails, majority rule is the norm many states follow. Why is this so; how can majority rule be defended and what are its limits? In order to provide an articulate and coherent answer, it is first necessary to lay down some premises to the functioning of the democratic process. Then, after arguing for majority rule, its flaws shall be assessed before eventually drawing potential alternatives from such dysfunctions.

The research will examine voting rights in relation to voting right inequalities and the society’s effort to have an all minority groups included in the civic process. The research will look into several historical factors that contributed to voting rights inequalities and how the society has evolved to solve issues related to the right to vote.

It is extremely important to protect the rights of the minority people in order to be able to live in a democracy. One of the basis that a democracy follows by is the ability to protect the rights of the minorities, so that everyone’s voice can be heard and respected.

Due to the flaws in the Presidental Election Process, the process lacks characertistics to truly be named as a democratic system. The unequal representation, the lack of attention and voice of minorities and lack of honesty and accuracy of mass media influencing the decision of voters causes the presidental election system to be less democratic. In order for the Presidental Election system to possess more characteristics of a democracy, it needs to center issues towards minorities in caucuses, conventions and debates. Also, campaigns needs to provide unbiased polls and educate potential voters in a more ethical manner.

The Extent to Which Voting by Ethnic Minorities Reflects the Voting Behaviour of the Whole Electorate

Historically in America, voting has been a relatively discriminatory practice. It has limited and deprived many individuals of many diverse races, ethnicities, and walks of life from casting their votes to select the individual who they feel is most educated, and skilled to represent their interests. Not only has this been proven to be wrong by discriminating minority groups in voting, it also has proved to be a process, which minimizes the largest growing demographics in the country. Furthermore, with millennials growing to become more politically active, minority groups are becoming more politically involved than ever. Taking this into account an important question that is raised by the author William Eskridge in his book “Legislation and Statutory Interpretation” is “Would minorities be better off with more representatives who had to pay attention to their interests because they are a powerful and organized constituency, rather than with a few representatives of minority districts who specialize in protecting only their interests?” (Eskridge,Frickley,& Garrett, 2006, pp.55).

Voting creates a situation when a majority and minority groups are the participants. The idea will be chosen if the majority supports it by ignoring the concerns of a minority group. This situation can stimulate conflict because minority group will be expected to accept the decision, even if it is against their convictions. The majority will choose the decision that is in their own interests by ignoring the minority rather than looking for another solution that would suit all. Consensus decision making is a well thought and dynamic way of reaching the agreement between all members of a group. This group is committed to finding solutions that everyone actively supports instead of simply voting for an idea and making the majority of the group

For decades, Canadians have been defending their right to have a fair and open electoral system. Since its creation in 1867, Canada has been proud to call itself a true democratic country, but today there would be many people who disagree with this statement. The Canadian electoral system, which uses First Past The Post (FPTP), has come under scrutiny for not being as fair as it claims to be. Over the past couple of decades, many countries have switched their system to Proportional Representation (PR) or some form of it. Based on successful results in other nations, Canada’s current FPTP system should change to Mixed Member Proportional (MMP), which is a form of Proportional Representation, as it will allow for more fair elections. The intent of this paper is to outline how an electoral reform from First Past the Post to Proportional Representation or Mixed-Member Proportional, will lead to more confidence in the government, more accurate seat-vote percentage, and better overall representation of the population.

Due to society, cultural diversity troubles the mode of governess. This is because at times there are circumstances where cultural ideologies oppress other cultures and limit the concept of a democratic