Customer Reviews

The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The subtitle of Heather Gerken's "The Democracy Index" is "Why Our Election System is Failing and How to Fix It." Gerken certainly presents many failures within the election system. However, she does not really explain how to fix it--she explains how we can gather the information needed to fix it.

Basically, Gerkin explains that there is not enough good data on why elections have problems, and until we collect better data on the process, we will not be able to solve the problems. Once we have better data, states and localities that have poor election systems can learn from the policies of the states and localities that have better election systems.

Gerkin sees two main problems with the current elelction system: partisanship and localism. Gerken also notes that "my assumption is that most election problems are caused by resource shortage, not partisanship."

Gerkin wants to "create an environment that is receptive to change." Her Democracy Index is "a data-driven, information-forcing device designed to generate pressure for reform." The Democracy Index's goal is to "rank states and localities based on election performance." The result would be that "a bad ranking provides a justification for getting more resources; a good ranking helps...protect a policy that is under attack."

Gerkin describes the good information that the Democracy Index could provide, and also identifies and discusses possible problems with the idea. It's refreshing to see someone explain both the costs and benefits of a plan. Gerkin compares the Democracy Index to other ratings system as well, to show how well such ratings work (and don't work). Gerkin also discusses the difficulties of enacting reform, and how these challenges could be overcome.

It seems to me that Gerkin may underestimate the cost of developing and maintaining the Democracy Index. The ranking system works only if "good" data is identified, and much effort would be needed to gather the data, analyze the data, verify that the data has not been tampered with, and publish the data.

Also, Gerkin does not really discuss whether or not the public truly sees election reform as a high-priority problem. Maybe it's a much more interesting problem to lawyers who study the election process and work on election campaigns?

Gerkin is a lawyer and professor of law at the Yale Law School. She worked in the "boiler room" as part of Obama's 2008 campaign's election protection team. Through this experience Gerkin had a front seat from which to observe the election process in action.

Though Gerkin worked for Obama, her book is free of partisan ideology, political sniping, and name-calling. This is a book both progressives and conservatives should enjoy reading.

Throughout the book Gerkin presents her arguments in clear, well-documented language, free of legal and academic jargon. It's a pleasure to read such a well-written book.

Heather Gerken is a chaired professor at Yale Law School and the leading expert on election law in her generation. In this thoughtful, provocative, and groundbreaking work, she argues for a "democracy index" which would rank the states according to how well they run their elections. We have already seen how various widely publicized ranking systems--like the U.S. News and World Reports ranking system of schools--have wielded enormous benefits to both consumers and institutions. This book promises to do the same for a state election law system that is badly broken. It has already inspired Senator Hillary Clinton to propose a bill requiring a feasibility study for the creation of such an index; it should also inspire policymakers, scholars, and general readers to engage its arguments.