Latin American Democracy and You
After having read the articles for week seven regarding the emergence of democracy in Latin America, I can say with some certainty that I have not thought of the quality of democracy in terms of its trajectory. Being an American, I have been lucky enough to live in the most stable democratic system in history. That said, I have been very much unaware that democracy is not something that is assured, and is not some indestructible system once it takes root. The emergence of democracy and democratic values does not guarantee the continuance of democracy and its ideals. In the context of the current American political situation, learning about how several nations in Latin America have developed into democracies, only to regress to outdated authoritarian regime has shed light on possible pitfalls our nation may find itself in. The article by Luna was interesting to me because I have never thought about accountability to power in terms of vertical and horizontal (vertical accountability being the power of the people to check power, and horizontal being the other parts of the government serving as checks) The ability for both the government itself and the citizenry to actively serve as a check on power is incredibly important. In my biased opinion, the United States’ system of checks and balances and constitutionally mandated separated branches imparts the strongest horizontal accountability. Latin American governments could take bits and pieces of this model to help protect themselves against the rise of authoritarians by giving power to legislatures and judiciaries. In terms of vertical accountability, or the ability of the people to act as a check on power, the emphasis clearly must be that all people should be able to vote. Most countries in Latin America have universal suffrage, which would lead to the assumption that vertical accountability might be powerful, but that would not always ring true. The lack of horizontal accountability might embolden those seeking to consolidate power by limiting or otherwise handicapping the ability of the people to meaningfully affect those in power. Sadly, as my comparisons to the United States continue, I believe that we too are guilty of trying to marginalize and otherwise weaken the will of the people. After all, “Vox Populi Vox Dei”. The United States, in my opinion, should reform of otherwise abandon the Electoral College so that there is more congruence between popular support and who actually wins elections. The system does little other than act as an unused security blanket that should prevent unqualified and otherwise incompetent people from achieving office. Now that we have now seen two modern instances of the popular will being ignored, it would be in our interest to dictate that the electors vote for she who wins the popular vote, while reserving their power to overturn the will of the people in dire circumstances. Also more generally, I think a multi-party system akin to those in Latin America and Europe would do better to serve the United States and more fully represent the electorate. My rant aside, the lessons learned from this weeks readings regarding the emergence and regression of Latin American democracy have been truly enlightening and hold true in other democracies, such as our own, as well.
Considering your focus on vertical accountability, what systems would you consider the best institutional choice for representation (i.e. presidentialsim vs. parliamentiarism)?
Interesting question. I would personally choose a hybrid system, not too much unlike what we have currently in the United States. I think a purely parliamentarian system is inherently less stable due to the head of the government being a part of the legislative and therefore being subject to the creation of a coalition which is tricky business regardless of how long standing a democracy might be. I would continue to elect presidents in separate elections, but I would change how the Representatives in the House are selected. Instead of single-member districts, which, as a matter of fact, leave 49 percent of the population with less than ideal representation, with multi-member districts that are more proportional. For example, the single member districts in the state of Ohio seat about a 75% majority of Republicans despite the fact the last election Republicans did not earn anywhere near as much of 75 percent of the vote. With my proposed structure, the make up of the state delegation will match the voting totals. So basically almost half Democrat and half Republican, with the occasional token third party member. I think reforming how the lower house gets chosen will increase vertical accountability to a more desirable level.
I think that both the system of checks and balances and the right to vote are key aspects in stabilizing the United States democratic system. As you stated, it has its flaws but historically it has been the most stable. Throughout this class, I have noticed a common theme in terms of Latin American democracy. Latin American countries seem to have a difficult time successfully implementing democracy due to things such as corruption, consolidation of power, limiting the freedoms of the people, and also failing economies. Adding aspects like the system of checks and balances would make a huge impact in preventing governments from switching back to authoritarian systems.