Electoral Reform in the United States

Early Electoral Reform in the U.S.

After the establishment of the U.S., the first significant legislation against electoral frauds was enacted in 1890 by New York State. It listed amounts that candidates for various offices might legally spend and required candidates to file itemized accounts of campaign expenditures. Violations of the law were punishable by imprisonment and loss of office. Subsequently, the law was extended to include the treasurers of political committees as well as the candidates they sponsored. Illegal registration, the use of false naturalization papers, personation, and bribery were made punishable by jail sentences of up to five years. Bribe givers were also disqualified from holding office, and bribe takers were disfranchised for five years. In 1909 New York State prohibited candidates from soliciting donations and forbade all corporations, except political organizations, from making campaign contributions or spending money for political ends. A one-year prison sentence and a $1000 fine were established as punishment for the violation of this law.

Other states also enacted electoral reform laws. Massachusetts forbade the practice of influencing voters with offers of employment and appointments to office, publication of unsigned political advertisements, subsidizing of newspapers to support candidates, contributions by certain corporations to political parties, and payments by political committees of naturalization fees for prospective voters. Oregon established a maximum amount of money that candidates are legally permitted to spend in pursuit of election and arranged to pay a part of their campaign expenses. Kansas prohibited a candidate from spending more than 10 percent of the yearly salary of the office to which he or she sought election. Most states now require publication by candidates of financial statements concerning their campaign expenses both before and after election day.

A federal law enacted in 1925 repealed all previous federal election laws and provided that treasurers of political committees, operating in two or more states, had to file with the clerk of the House of Representatives sworn statements containing the names and addresses of all contributors of $100 or more, the names and addresses of all persons receiving $10 or more from the moneys collected by the committees, and the purposes for which the disbursements were made. Candidates for Congress were required to submit itemized accounts of contributions made to their campaign expenses both before and after election. Limits were placed on the amounts candidates were allowed to expend in campaigning. Candidates for public office, members of Congress, and federal employees were prohibited from soliciting campaign contributions among government workers. National banks and corporations organized under congressional charter were forbidden to make contributions to the campaign funds of candidates for congressional seats and for the electoral college. A drastic and far-reaching measure, known as the Hatch Act, was passed by Congress in 1939 and amended in 1940. Designed to discourage the spoils system of political patronage in favor of a genuine merit system for selecting and training employees in the civil service, the Hatch Act prohibits certain types of political activity on the part of federal employees. Violation of this central provision of the Hatch Act was made punishable by loss of position, among other things.

Voting Rights

Electoral practices aimed at preventing blacks from exercising their legal right to vote were the focus of electoral reform in the 1950s and ’60s. The most sweeping reforms were embodied in the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This law provided for automatic suspension of literacy tests and other voter qualification devices because they were applied in a discriminatory way; gave federal voting examiners the authority to register voters in areas not meeting certain voter participation requirements; authorized the U.S. attorney general to investigate the validity of state poll taxes; required federal review to prevent racial discrimination by new state voting laws; and made interference with voting rights conferred by the law a criminal offense. Supplementing this law was the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1964, prohibiting poll taxes as a qualification for voting in federal elections.

In 1970 the Voting Rights Act was extended and the voting age was lowered to 18. The Supreme Court later upheld the vote for 18-year-olds in federal elections, but ruled that Congress had acted unconstitutionally in lowering the voting age to 18 in state and local elections. This problem was solved by the 26th Amendment, ratified in 1971, providing that citizens 18 years of age or older could not be denied the franchise “on account of age.”

The Voting Rights Act has been amended twice, in 1975 and 1982. Among the most important provisions of the later amendments were the addition of bilingual requirements in some counties; a permanent nationwide ban on the use of literacy tests as a voting requirement; and a law allowing voters nationwide who are illiterate, blind, or disabled to be assisted in the voting booth by a person of their own choice. These amendments also made it easier for minorities to use the courts to attack discriminatory election methods. Other laws have been passed that protect the franchise of certain groups; for example, U.S. citizens residing abroad were granted the right to vote in federal elections by absentee ballot in 1975, and voting accessibility for the elderly was guaranteed in 1984.

Reapportionment and Redistricting

A major concern of supporters of electoral reform has been the establishment of election districts that are nearly equal in population. In districts that are unequal, a disproportionate power has often been given to a small number of voters, especially those in sparsely populated areas. In the case of Baker v. Carr (1962), the Supreme Court declared this kind of disproportionate representation unconstitutional and said the principle of “one person, one vote” must govern state legislative apportionment if the states are to satisfy constitutional requirements. The Court further clarified its position in 1963 by outlawing the Georgia county-unit system, under which all the votes assigned to each county went to the candidate who won a majority of its popular vote. It ruled in 1964 that the “one person, one vote” rule applied to both houses of state legislatures. After these decisions, most legislatures were reapportioned, often with significant changes in political power.

In 1985 the Supreme Court for the first time took up the issue of gerrymandering. The Court ruled that the manipulation of election district lines to give one political party an advantage over the others violates the Constitution. See Gerrymander.

Campaign Financing

Increasing concern over the use of money in elections led to the passage of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 and its subsequent amendments. The act places strict limits on the amount of individual and group contributions and on the amount that can be spent on media advertising. Among its most significant features is the requirement for full and periodic disclosures of all contributions and disbursements on behalf of candidates. Its most novel provision, however, is for the partial federal financing of presidential primary campaigns and the full federal financing of presidential campaigns in the general election. A full-time bipartisan Federal Election Commission was established in 1975 to enforce this complex law.

Source: “Electoral Reform” Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia. Contributed by Robert E. Burke