The first red flag that this whole process is messed up is that that first guy had to take a year off to campaign. Y'know, instead of just applying for a job, getting it, and doing the job, or applying, getting rejected, and moving on to the next one within a few days/weeks. It's just so inefficient! No wonder everybody complains that nothing works!
That defeatist attitude, that there's no point imagining a better system, is the entire reason systems don't improve! If a situation sucks, don't just give in, but join the push to make it better ❤
Help has been trying to come in, for ages, but you are ignoring it. Or you find it hard to believe, people offer genuine help with wanting anything back. USA are going to get through this. Even though its awful, its something they have to go through. USA are more than able to handle this. We all get to learn. And if you need a hug, we have Koalas.
Thanks Casey Briggs and your team for such a riveting series. What has been so puzzling has been …well you did your best with a very challenging system. What we take for granted in Australia is really a blessing. Be proud it is a great privilege to watch and share.
Very strange for us UK people, where those in charge of water are regulators attached to the government. Our judges are life-time legal people with decades of experience and appointed by an independent committee based on merit. They also have a system to replace those who are criminal or confused and old.
To be fair, judges in the US still hold law degrees and are legal professionals and members of the bar. It's not like we're electing steve off the street corner to be a judge.
@@ldkellandshaw yes, in Australia its the same for judges. They’re the best of the best and are held to a very high standard indeed. Our political system is based on the UK’s Westminster system because were still part of the British Commonwealth, and thats why there’ll never be a Donald in the highest office here. The majority of us still think he’s a total joke, but dangerous too
@@michellewillems4416 'It can never happen here'... the refrain of most countries. Until it does. Ask the UK and BoJo, Australia is no exception I;m afraid.
Thankyou for these episodes, helps to understand and learn about this system. You ask questions and majority of time, Americans will ignore the questions or just be downright rude, unhelpful and hurtful. It also helps me to understand USA's obsession with popularity where majority of the time, I and we couldn't care less about popularity.
So glad I'm an Aussie. Our systems are by no way perfect. But I can't believe the ridiculous, complicated, partisan and opaque US way of doing things. The inmates have taken over the asylum. 😢
I guess America's situation of voting for the most mundane kinds of work of service, is the Nth degree of a free enterprise mandate. In Australia, we don't need to vote for our Animal Control person, they get picked by Local Council/Shire Government through the normal process of advertising and hiring the person who should be most qualified for such a task. As to electing Judges and Senior ones in that way, well that is just like a Beauty Pageant. Absolutely open to rigging and getting people who get elected, solely on the basis of partisan politics, rigging and influence. It's such a rabbit hole that getting someone who can actually DO the job is not part of the pre-requisite qualities of doing the job, but a popularity contest. The worst example is the current Presidential Race, where the most important attributes, are not necessarily the person's ability, but the popularity of the Candidate, ergo why discussion of polls have been so endemic. It's a really dumb way to select someone who has to both keep secrets, without letting damaging the National Security of the country, and has the nuclear codes to destroy us all within minutes. This only works if there's someone at the top who will be both decisive, and also available to use the knowledge and experience of others who are qualified, not always the case. Abso-f-ing-lute-ly crazy, and explains a lot about the psyche of the American citizenry and civics. Why elect someone who can do the job, when you can get someone who looks good on camera? In Aus, we all don't get to elect the Prime Minister, the Party selects, and elects the one they feel best provides the best path to govern. Its a case of being the best of the small group, rather than convincing the whole of the country. Only the people in the PM's electorate get to really decide if they stay or go. But it's usually a 'safe' seat, unless the PM is REALLY unpopular, usually a reflection of the majority of Australian public sentiment.
For the pm, I try to view it by which party wins the most seats. If i just look at electorates, it can be depressing 🤨 Addressing the judiciary: For countries that emphasis separation of powers, it doesn't make sense that judges would be appointed by one or two other branches. That doesn't show separation of powers, but fusion of powers. For all countries, its hard to have judicial independence if the people appointing the judges are politicians (legislative) or even just the executive. Electing judges makes sense to me, but I think instead of election, it should be the same way they select juries (voir dire for nonpartisanship) and have them sit for either a case or for a very short term, rotating out jury-judges so the whole bench doesn't leave at once. Also have law clerks to advise the jury-judges who probably don't have legal training.
Think about handcounting ballots with 92 positions, each with multiple candidates. This demonstrates a serious need for machine counting - or to have fewer elected positions.
One glaring omission here: why aren't Supreme Court judges appointed by election?? Everyone else seems to be, and the shameless politicisation of these positions isn't a trade secret.
What an expensive, impractical way to carry out a job interview. The obvious issues of money and politics influencing the appointment of what should be impartial government job positions seems to be missed entirely by those content with their system. Where does it end? Should they elect military leaders too? The sad thing is, they are as unlikely to change any of this as they are to adopt the metric system (for the same reasons).
The mental gymnastics of the interviewed, trying to justify the system they're in is incredible. It doesnt lead to the best outcomes or the best candidate.
Everything seems broken over there, from the crumbling roads, to having too many popularity contests. You can really get a sense for why the people in the US have had enough.
When you try to make a democracy in a world of kingdoms in the EIGHTEENTH century; pre-train, pre-telegraph, when transportation was by horse or boat; yeah, you end up with separate elections in each county, out of necessity. And then, it’s REALLY hard to change. 😬
I suppose that makes sense for some of the positions, but for a lot of other positions they seemed to be created just out of pure habit. For instance voting for district attorney according to this video was a custom that begun in the 1800s and spread around. The US had, seemingly, functioned well without needing to make this position elected; one would think that this custom begun because it was considered a 'normal' thing to do. This includes positions such as 'water treatment officer' which wouldn't have really been a thing at independence. I would also point out that many of the democracies that immediately followed the US, being the independent nations of Central and South America, really didn't adopt many of these voting habits despite still being pre-telegraph and pre-train. I suppose one of the few differences I can think of is that due to their historical instability there has been many chances to re-write constitutions since. But by the same token the US Civil War is probably the sort of event that most nations would use for significant reform (especially as most of these elected positions aren't enshrined in the Bill of Rights).
I would argue that since the fifties the US judiciary has been increasingly partisan and far more political than ever intended. This strikes me as bad design (not that it does not do what it was intended to, but that it does it badly.)
I see no justification for saying the 1950's court was "partisan", especially since the political parties didn't really get partisan until the 1960's. I think the only way you would arrive at such a position if you were looking at the American Political System not through the lens of the political parties, but primarily through the lens of the conservative movement, who would practically believed the entire country was anti-conservative/or anti-old right since the New Deal or the presidency of FDR.
Was a bit surprised to see ABC featuring my most downballot local races! It’s both a bit sad but also validating to know that even LaDoris Cordell’s friends still have no idea how to vote on these. I think I’m an unusually engaged voter, and it takes me basically days to just read up on each candidate’s statements - and don’t even get into the complexities of California propositions!
In Austalia, Independent judiciaries, Independent electoral bodies Transparent limited political donations, Not completely sure on gerrymandering control, Mandatory state & federal voting. No electoral colleges. So much better than the US Model which is self evident.
Yet look at how well that's working out for us. If there's anyone going all out to keep the rich rich and the poor poor, it's the Australian government, and their abuse of representative politics to make appointments and decisions based on personal benefit, not the benefit of their constituents.
The second campaign I ever worked on was a friend of my mom who ran for the school board and his entire campaign was based on the idea that a campaign could be run without the insanely high costs. I ran it as one of only 2 volunteers and I was in 9th grade at the time. He only accepted donations of $200 per person and did a lot of local media (mostly radio.) this was in 2000 in Alexandria VA, just outside DC. He lost but got about a third of the vote and only spent 1% as much as his opponent and frankly the only real difference was he ran TV ads. I honestly don't know how you'd even spend the amounts that are standard today and frankly I have no idea who's running in my local elections. Research is impossible and I feel like it's on purpose so I'm unable to have a clue who or what I'm voting for
Jesus, no wonder l've sometimes heard or read that some people wait hours in line at the polling place in America. With so many positions that you have to vote for it must take forever for some people to just complete their ballot. Here in Australia you have the option of ranking in order 'below the line' if you want to be detailed and rank specific candidates, or you can choose to mark 'above the line' where it's just ranking parties. And you don't have to fill it all out. You could just put a "1" next to the party you are voting for and be done with it, literally takes 5 seconds, or go "1" "2" "3" and stop there even though there's more parties.
@lemurwrench6344 I just think there is no need to vote for a role that should just be selected for via job interviews. The best candidate should be hired by skills, career history and merit. Not by popularity contest. This just opens up the role to corruption by the voted official needing to return the favour to those who funded their campaign
@lemurwrench6344 the oversight you want is the power to report corrupt officials to an investigatory panel. The campaigning process A) politicises a position which should be apolitical and B) welcomes the bribing and shady corrupt behaviour that the US is so famous for
@@JambAndSee Thing is, if you follow the chain of who picks the person for the role, it always ends at an elected official, so it's going to be political no matter what. at least by directly electing these positions, you can decentralize power and allow voters to atomize their preferences instead of having to commit to one person who has power over several different domains.
@@lemurwrench6344 But the caveat to this assumption is that it assumes: a) That the position in question which you are voting for was always going to be a politically-assigned position, and hence you may as well exercise your political right to select the position directly, b) That each voter choosing for these positions is well-informed about the position in question as well as the candidates applying for it, c) That the money invested by third parties towards promoting certain candidates does not motivate an additional political necessity to favour the wishes of these investors.
I'm convinced that the ballot glut (yeah, I said it) just comes from legacied-in small-town thinking that never got the rules update it needs AND the people with a vested interest in keeping things hard to navigate. A.G.
Never forget: "In any legal dispute the only certain winners are the lawyers". They thrive on dissent, distraction, bent truth, delay & dissembling. They do have their role, but beware!
Wow as an Aussie that just seems crazy to elect a DA??? If that were here all they would need to do and all any one would be bothered about is to promise not prosecute anyone who gets picked up by speed camera??
lol I hadn't thought of that. I suppose promising not to prosecute anyone speeding would probably get you to lose the election (there would be enough terrified parents for instance), but promising to "increase speed limits on the M1 to 120km/hr" (by not enforcing speed fines below this limit on this road) or promising to "legalise fully-automatic weapon ownership" (by not enforcing bans) do seem like bizarrely influential promises that you could make with no oversight.
I don't understand who contributes what in my local LGA election for councillors. Local state and federal is all you need. This is silly. Hire the most qualified to look after the water
In the U.K. our Supreme Court is completely independent from government. They are very happy to go at the government if they feel they are breaking the law, such as Rwanda. The U.K. law system isn’t perfect but it is independent from government and I would consider it fair.
Every week, I am bewildered by something crazy or stupid in the States. At least we all get to hide behind their marines and aircraft carriers 😂 'murica
If voters need to do too much work to figure out who to vote for, then you won’t have effective elections. I voted in the elections for Melbourne City Council this week. Unlike every other council, there’s no wards and so you have to choose people across the whole council (my mum lives 15 minutes away and choose between 3 for her ward). We also vote separately for the Lord Mayor and Deputy (11 options). It took me a day and a half to fully research all 58 councillor and 22 leadership candidates, which is way too much time. Most people vote one number above the line which means that party gets to choose all the preferences and ungrouped candidates can’t get first preference votes. Even my boss didn’t vote because it took so long to decide his preferences and he didn’t get to the post box in time. It’s not a good system because people end up guessing, or only choose based of the candidate statements provided and don’t look up their actual policies.
1.5 weeks to go! And then we're either free of it or in for 4 more years of dreading turning on the evening news to hear what the Bozo in Chief has destroyed today 😅
Thanks for this story, I’ve struggled with understanding how the US has so many elections and elected positions. Makes sense why Americas think being famous or popular is so important, everything is a popularity contest instead of the best person for the job getting it. As an introvert this is my nightmare!
For countries that emphasis separation of powers, it doesn't make sense that judges would be appointed by one or two other branches. That doesn't show separation of powers, but fusion of powers. For all countries, its hard to have judicial independence if the people appointing the judges are politicians (legislative) or even just the executive. Electing judges makes sense to me, but I think instead of election, it should be the same way they select juries (voir dire for nonpartisanship) and have them sit for either a case or for a very short term, rotating out jury-judges so the whole bench doesn't leave at once. Also have law clerks to advise the jury-judges who probably don't have legal training.
A very important topic ❤! Democracy is the backbone of the nation's social fabric. For its proper & judicious functioning,the electorate must be aware of the system & be actively involved as well as the political leaders & others involved must work for the betterment of the people & the nation ! Thanks ❤
Having lived in the US, I can concur with the concepts of this video. Most people don’t have the time or energy to get interested in politics. Voting is not compulsory and gift percent or more, ignore elections completely.
My children (27,19,18,) and I took nearly 2 hours to complete our Nevada Ballot because researching each office / candidate took a lot of time. There are too many on the ballot. But we don’t get to vote smaller, local elections because we are not in America enough. 🇺🇸
The key change that America needs to make is to REMOVE the money. Here in the UK, political parties are allotted a set amount of time and caps on campaign budgets based on the size of their party in Parliamentary elections. Given the nature of the culture in the US, maybe local TV stations should be mandated to provide local election coverage and interview candidates? I also think the main point of this is correct in that there are FAR too many elections in the US.
I'm starting to wonder if all of these govt-appointment-by-elections is a defence against anti-tyranny insurrection... which only _might_ work for those elections where the electorate is paying attention. It's almost as though every city council has asked, "what if the Public hates such-and-such public employee"? "I know! Let's make it the Public's problem!", then added yet another govt position to the ballot.
Too much democracy.. give me a break - we have an Oligarchy that allows the rabble to make a bunch of noise so long as the continue to act look good cattle the rest for the year.
You're right. If you can't vote for someone or some party that has policies that aligns to your values and ideas and instead have to vote for the least worse option, to vote against someone rather than for someone - or not vote at all - then that is not really a democracy at all.
@@bruceb7464 Yes, it is a democracy. A democracy does not need to pander to special interests ("policies that aligns to your values and ideas") to qualify as a democracy. I would argue the prevelence of special interests in America's pluralistic model makes it a worse form of democracy, more beholden to special/marginal interests, than otherwise. A healthy democracy should end up with a government that reflects the will of the majority, but it should operate to protect the rights of the (reasonable) minority in delivering the policies the majority elected it for. The US presidential election is the opposite of this. A minority elect the president (a few swing states) and there is very little stopping a corrupt president from working only for a minority of vested interests, like Trump did.
@drew3030 our system fails, and is an oligarchy, for the simple fact that it is designed to ensure that 'representatives' are responsive to those that can leverage the most wealth in elections - money doesn't buy votes, it scares elected officials - on purpose.
Real talk! As a halfway politically savvy American this felt like an authoritarian propaganda piece but what do I know? Things went downhill fast after the Citizens United debauchery but big tech put a hammer on the nail imao.
@@5049usrluvtyxso a piece produced by another democracy is propaganda when it shines the light on your failures. Casey is data journalist and holds a Master's degree in Mathematics - your qualifications?
I feel like the question that should be asked is, "Why don't we vote for SCOTUS," and "Why do federal judges get appointed to lifetime positions without being voted on?" Knowing this gets to the reason why women in the US lost a fundamental right that they had for the last 50 years.
A guy running for the water district shouldn’t have to campaign to keep water costs down. He shouldn’t be campaigning at all. But also, maybe, be concerned about safe drinking water instead? Why this isn’t an appointed position based on experience and past service I’ll never know. We have representatives and executives at federal, state, county and municipal levels, it would be their jobs to appoint theee types of managers The heart of all this is, unfortunately, opportunity to make money from the positions obtained. Why else would someone dip into their retirement to run for water management?
21:14 Says it all really. How any society can think a Technical position is best filled by a popularity contest VS real world expertise just beggars belief. I would however like to know if there are minimum standards required to be on a ballot.
Money is the issue: Corruption is when someone takes money surreptitiously to give an advantage. The American form of bribery is lobbying and buying elections.
I live in Arkansas, one of nine states that do not even allow write-in candidates. My only choices are what they decide. We can't change the system by voting even if we wanted to.
From my far away perspective here in Britain where we don’t even get to elect our Head of State or upper House of Parliament It’s not so much that there are too many elections, although a good many of them could be better chosen by elected bodies like councils or state legislatures, but it’s the cost... who the hell can fork out hundreds of thousands to get into the city council? Here you’ll probably spend about £200 😂 (which is a good thing)... unless you’re in London and have to pay the ridiculous £10,000 deposit to run for mayor which should be illegal. Money as a barrier to public office is wrong. Oh and when it comes to judges and prosecutors... that’s when I’m really against direct election, they should be chosen by a mix of elected officials and other experts in their field by a large consensus as to who is the best for the job, after working to attain a degree for it of course.
I think the deposits help stop a thousand candidates or something, which could intimidate or confuse some people. I do think £10,000 is a bit much though
@ true but you could just raise the signature thresholds- people should be deemed as a serious candidate if they can get the support of a sufficient number of voters to get them onto the ballot, not because they’re able to fork out for it. Also nice to see a fellow republican here!
Don’t forget! Election Day is the first Tuesday in November. Except when it’s not. Between the annual election, special elections and primaries, we can have 3-4 elections per year.
After a while I get decision fatigue. Like what do you mean I'm voting for whether school kids get free lunch? Just give the kids lunch. Clean up that river. Make a quick decision so more things can get done.
In Germany, we do have only 4* elections. The national and statewide elections for the respective parliaments and local elections for the city/town council and mayor (depending where you live you either don't have a mayoral election because your city is a state like Berlin or you do have additional local election on the county level). And the mayoral election is the only one where you elect only one person. Our local councils consist mostly out of 15 to 60 members who are elected through party lists and they have the tasks to * elect and appoint the heads of local bodies like the local DoT * set prices for the municipal water and waste collection services (the prices for said services have to fund the services to 100%) * give funding to local school buildings (the teachers are paid by the state) * and a few more also depending on how large the municipal body is and whether it has cultural or other institutions (like Zoos or theaters) The mayor is the highest bureaucratic office in a municipality and appoints lower bureaucratic officers As a former candidate for our city council I was pretty frustrated during our last election because local topics like the housing prices weren't really important for the voters. They asked us about immigration, security or other national topics we cannot work on on municipal level.
I think its hilarious that people think judges are non-partisan just because they say and expected to be. Perhaps that is more true among local judges, but the bigger the court the more partisan. The current Supreme Court is overwhelmingly conservative and its obvious.
The country with governments that happily implement fascism as a 'solution' to what they (incorrectly) deem are problems shouldn't be asking others if they're ok.
As someone who has knocked on doors plenty here stateside, I will tell you that most Americans are friendly and decent when you do so. We are territorial, though, so the basic arrangement of asking a stranger to align with you ideologically on their own turf is a fraught one.
Ridiculous how money determines everything. I wish elections could be centrally / government funded, where everyone running gets the same amount of resources. And the election season is limited to 1 month. I also think there should be no parties, just individuals with their own platforms. I must be naive.
No we don’t think that. What we see is an obvious danger in politicising public roles when they ought to be filled by applicants with the best credentials. And when I say we, I mean pretty much everyone outside of the US.
Yeah, honestly as much as people complain that campaign ads are the reason election year feels too long, they're not far off, it's because the down-ballot races and state constitution amendments are almost worth 2-3 pages in some counties
This is a good video which is why I am a supporter of implementing a parliamentary system with members of the legislatures elected through a closed party list system so that voters can vote for the party that best aligns with their values and those parties will form coalitions with other parties through negotiations to form the government and implement policies on behalf of their voters. But I do believe we should greatly reduce the amount of elected offices we have. For one, I don't think judges, water district people and so forth should be elected offices they should be appointed by the state legislature or the county board of supervisors.
While I think voting for judges is something you could argue for (they are vital after all and sometimes decide over the legality of laws, there are pros and cons), assigning a suitable expert to run the water system is the very same thing I elect a government for... at least where I come from, but America you do you😅
I live in Australia and my US county's absentee ballot can only be faxed. Can we spend some of that special interest money to get into the 21st century? Most young adults don't even know what a fax is.
Aussie here too - many GP clinics still use fax machines to transfer patient or script info! Completely nuts, considering the fax machine is based on... I think this is correct... a 9.6kbps modem speed :D Welcome to 1991!
Switzerland has a lot of referenda not so much voting for minor officials like in America. Their population is also a lot better educated and more cohesive.
Elections and elected positions are not the same as democracy. Democracy comes when the people are the source of legitimacy and have control over aspects of their life through genuine consultation and democratic input. Electoralism may be useed to create a facade of democracy, which I would contend the USA has.
I don't think it's the voting process it is elf that is the issue. It's the fact that even the most uneducated, ignorant people can cast a ballot for flagrant liars and corrupt parties while the candidates themselves go through little to no vetting. We end up with people who are unqualified for their jobs, elected by others who are totally unaware of what capabilities their candidate even needs to be successful in the position.
Issue with voting is it gives people choices but lets then make the choice arbitrarily. Theres no difference between a vote cast on poor decision making, or selfish motives, or actual rigorious analysis.
On the website in TH-cam summary of programmes can you group videos under themes say US elections so we can find the series easily. You say this is part 4. I am having trouble finding the other 3 parts For all programmes including 4 Corners and 7/30 comments section should be opened. It's unfair to have decent programmes but the viewers cannot comment. Freedom to comment works both ways.
How does DEI factor into these elections? And if it's so low numbers of people voting then a simple "free lunch" from the richest candidate will win...why would I let Joe Smith who doesn't read a news paper decide on who a judge should be..he has no expertise in the subject lol
The first red flag that this whole process is messed up is that that first guy had to take a year off to campaign. Y'know, instead of just applying for a job, getting it, and doing the job, or applying, getting rejected, and moving on to the next one within a few days/weeks. It's just so inefficient! No wonder everybody complains that nothing works!
I will never get over the insanity of the US electoral system compared to the Australian system run by the AEC.
Ours is terrible. Mail in ballots and pro Palestinian voter intimidation. I’m done with democracy bring on Trump and end it.
well we may need your help, if trump overthrows our country.
@@GamersDelight4541does that mean more Americans will be emigrating like they did in 2016?
@@JBLegal09Did they?
Ill never get over how Aussies let the Government run them during COVID.
A ballot with 92 races feels like an exam, damn!
That defeatist attitude, that there's no point imagining a better system, is the entire reason systems don't improve! If a situation sucks, don't just give in, but join the push to make it better ❤
No we're not okay, please stop asking and send help.
I have a hug, does that help? 🤗
No one is going the help the richest country on earth. Deal with your own problems.
🤣
Can the USA ask The UN to send Election Observers? You know. Like in 3rd World struggling Democracies???
Help has been trying to come in, for ages, but you are ignoring it. Or you find it hard to believe, people offer genuine help with wanting anything back. USA are going to get through this. Even though its awful, its something they have to go through. USA are more than able to handle this. We all get to learn. And if you need a hug, we have Koalas.
Thanks Casey Briggs and your team for such a riveting series. What has been so puzzling has been …well you did your best with a very challenging system. What we take for granted in Australia is really a blessing. Be proud it is a great privilege to watch and share.
Very strange for us UK people, where those in charge of water are regulators attached to the government. Our judges are life-time legal people with decades of experience and appointed by an independent committee based on merit. They also have a system to replace those who are criminal or confused and old.
Same here in Oz
To be fair, judges in the US still hold law degrees and are legal professionals and members of the bar. It's not like we're electing steve off the street corner to be a judge.
@@ldkellandshaw yes, in Australia its the same for judges. They’re the best of the best and are held to a very high standard indeed. Our political system is based on the UK’s Westminster system because were still part of the British Commonwealth, and thats why there’ll never be a Donald in the highest office here. The majority of us still think he’s a total joke, but dangerous too
@@michellewillems4416 'It can never happen here'... the refrain of most countries. Until it does. Ask the UK and BoJo,
Australia is no exception I;m afraid.
@@ldkellandshaw mate, I dont think you appreciate my knowledge!
America if you're ok, would you tell us that you're ok?
We’re not 😪our votes aren’t worth the same I live in mi mine is worth more than someone in NYC
Are you kidding? Half are country are liars and the other half can't wrap their heads around the truth! 😅
America, are you okay? Will you tell us that you're okay?🎶
There's a sound at the window that he struck you, a crescendo, America 🎵
My state is one of nine that do not even allow write-in candidates. My only choices are what they decide.
American here and no, we aren't ok
Sorry folks! There was a glitch in the original vid that needed fixing, so we’ve re-uploaded this one.
We’ll forgive you, but don’t let it happen again or you’ll get a ticket.
The "does the system work" timestamp didnt work XD
This is what happens when you don't have an electoral vote for the video editor at the ABC... 😜
Really enjoying Casey Briggs doing this mini-series! He's really entertaining as a host, thumbs up from me.
Thankyou for these episodes, helps to understand and learn about this system. You ask questions and majority of time, Americans will ignore the questions or just be downright rude, unhelpful and hurtful. It also helps me to understand USA's obsession with popularity where majority of the time, I and we couldn't care less about popularity.
So glad I'm an Aussie. Our systems are by no way perfect. But I can't believe the ridiculous, complicated, partisan and opaque US way of doing things. The inmates have taken over the asylum. 😢
I guess America's situation of voting for the most mundane kinds of work of service, is the Nth degree of a free enterprise mandate.
In Australia, we don't need to vote for our Animal Control person, they get picked by Local Council/Shire Government through the normal process of advertising and hiring the person who should be most qualified for such a task. As to electing Judges and Senior ones in that way, well that is just like a Beauty Pageant. Absolutely open to rigging and getting people who get elected, solely on the basis of partisan politics, rigging and influence.
It's such a rabbit hole that getting someone who can actually DO the job is not part of the pre-requisite qualities of doing the job, but a popularity contest. The worst example is the current Presidential Race, where the most important attributes, are not necessarily the person's ability, but the popularity of the Candidate, ergo why discussion of polls have been so endemic. It's a really dumb way to select someone who has to both keep secrets, without letting damaging the National Security of the country, and has the nuclear codes to destroy us all within minutes. This only works if there's someone at the top who will be both decisive, and also available to use the knowledge and experience of others who are qualified, not always the case.
Abso-f-ing-lute-ly crazy, and explains a lot about the psyche of the American citizenry and civics. Why elect someone who can do the job, when you can get someone who looks good on camera?
In Aus, we all don't get to elect the Prime Minister, the Party selects, and elects the one they feel best provides the best path to govern. Its a case of being the best of the small group, rather than convincing the whole of the country.
Only the people in the PM's electorate get to really decide if they stay or go. But it's usually a 'safe' seat, unless the PM is REALLY unpopular, usually a reflection of the majority of Australian public sentiment.
For the pm, I try to view it by which party wins the most seats. If i just look at electorates, it can be depressing 🤨
Addressing the judiciary:
For countries that emphasis separation of powers, it doesn't make sense that judges would be appointed by one or two other branches. That doesn't show separation of powers, but fusion of powers.
For all countries, its hard to have judicial independence if the people appointing the judges are politicians (legislative) or even just the executive.
Electing judges makes sense to me, but I think instead of election, it should be the same way they select juries (voir dire for nonpartisanship) and have them sit for either a case or for a very short term, rotating out jury-judges so the whole bench doesn't leave at once. Also have law clerks to advise the jury-judges who probably don't have legal training.
Think about handcounting ballots with 92 positions, each with multiple candidates. This demonstrates a serious need for machine counting - or to have fewer elected positions.
Both.
One glaring omission here: why aren't Supreme Court judges appointed by election?? Everyone else seems to be, and the shameless politicisation of these positions isn't a trade secret.
I was just thinking that.
A great thought-provoking video l.
21:23 that *_IS_* the right question. Whoever manages the water system should be competent, not popular.
What an expensive, impractical way to carry out a job interview. The obvious issues of money and politics influencing the appointment of what should be impartial government job positions seems to be missed entirely by those content with their system. Where does it end? Should they elect military leaders too? The sad thing is, they are as unlikely to change any of this as they are to adopt the metric system (for the same reasons).
The mental gymnastics of the interviewed, trying to justify the system they're in is incredible. It doesnt lead to the best outcomes or the best candidate.
2:21 No, Sir. Not even a little.
Everything seems broken over there, from the crumbling roads, to having too many popularity contests. You can really get a sense for why the people in the US have had enough.
When you try to make a democracy in a world of kingdoms in the EIGHTEENTH century; pre-train, pre-telegraph, when transportation was by horse or boat; yeah, you end up with separate elections in each county, out of necessity. And then, it’s REALLY hard to change. 😬
I suppose that makes sense for some of the positions, but for a lot of other positions they seemed to be created just out of pure habit. For instance voting for district attorney according to this video was a custom that begun in the 1800s and spread around. The US had, seemingly, functioned well without needing to make this position elected; one would think that this custom begun because it was considered a 'normal' thing to do. This includes positions such as 'water treatment officer' which wouldn't have really been a thing at independence.
I would also point out that many of the democracies that immediately followed the US, being the independent nations of Central and South America, really didn't adopt many of these voting habits despite still being pre-telegraph and pre-train. I suppose one of the few differences I can think of is that due to their historical instability there has been many chances to re-write constitutions since. But by the same token the US Civil War is probably the sort of event that most nations would use for significant reform (especially as most of these elected positions aren't enshrined in the Bill of Rights).
I would argue that since the fifties the US judiciary has been increasingly partisan and far more political than ever intended. This strikes me as bad design (not that it does not do what it was intended to, but that it does it badly.)
The founders didn't intend for Congress to have political parties, never mind the judiciary!
I see no justification for saying the 1950's court was "partisan", especially since the political parties didn't really get partisan until the 1960's. I think the only way you would arrive at such a position if you were looking at the American Political System not through the lens of the political parties, but primarily through the lens of the conservative movement, who would practically believed the entire country was anti-conservative/or anti-old right since the New Deal or the presidency of FDR.
Why is all these govt jobs political????
Was a bit surprised to see ABC featuring my most downballot local races! It’s both a bit sad but also validating to know that even LaDoris Cordell’s friends still have no idea how to vote on these.
I think I’m an unusually engaged voter, and it takes me basically days to just read up on each candidate’s statements - and don’t even get into the complexities of California propositions!
Indeed, to be an engaged voter is time-consuming and quite an effort.
In Austalia,
Independent judiciaries,
Independent electoral bodies
Transparent limited political donations,
Not completely sure on gerrymandering control,
Mandatory state & federal voting. No electoral colleges.
So much better than the US Model which is self evident.
Add Preferential Voting (instead of First Past the Post)
Yet look at how well that's working out for us. If there's anyone going all out to keep the rich rich and the poor poor, it's the Australian government, and their abuse of representative politics to make appointments and decisions based on personal benefit, not the benefit of their constituents.
@@CharGorilla I wouldn't trade it for the US system.
The second campaign I ever worked on was a friend of my mom who ran for the school board and his entire campaign was based on the idea that a campaign could be run without the insanely high costs. I ran it as one of only 2 volunteers and I was in 9th grade at the time. He only accepted donations of $200 per person and did a lot of local media (mostly radio.) this was in 2000 in Alexandria VA, just outside DC. He lost but got about a third of the vote and only spent 1% as much as his opponent and frankly the only real difference was he ran TV ads. I honestly don't know how you'd even spend the amounts that are standard today and frankly I have no idea who's running in my local elections. Research is impossible and I feel like it's on purpose so I'm unable to have a clue who or what I'm voting for
Jesus, no wonder l've sometimes heard or read that some people wait hours in line at the polling place in America. With so many positions that you have to vote for it must take forever for some people to just complete their ballot. Here in Australia you have the option of ranking in order 'below the line' if you want to be detailed and rank specific candidates, or you can choose to mark 'above the line' where it's just ranking parties. And you don't have to fill it all out. You could just put a "1" next to the party you are voting for and be done with it, literally takes 5 seconds, or go "1" "2" "3" and stop there even though there's more parties.
The title of this series is hilarious 😂!...and NO, we are not ok!!! Send help! 😫
@20:20 "[as a district attorney] if the voters think you're doing a bad job, they have the right to remove you".... that's so dangerous of an idea
You think democracy is a dangerous idea?
@lemurwrench6344 I just think there is no need to vote for a role that should just be selected for via job interviews. The best candidate should be hired by skills, career history and merit. Not by popularity contest. This just opens up the role to corruption by the voted official needing to return the favour to those who funded their campaign
@lemurwrench6344 the oversight you want is the power to report corrupt officials to an investigatory panel. The campaigning process A) politicises a position which should be apolitical and B) welcomes the bribing and shady corrupt behaviour that the US is so famous for
@@JambAndSee Thing is, if you follow the chain of who picks the person for the role, it always ends at an elected official, so it's going to be political no matter what. at least by directly electing these positions, you can decentralize power and allow voters to atomize their preferences instead of having to commit to one person who has power over several different domains.
@@lemurwrench6344 But the caveat to this assumption is that it assumes:
a) That the position in question which you are voting for was always going to be a politically-assigned position, and hence you may as well exercise your political right to select the position directly,
b) That each voter choosing for these positions is well-informed about the position in question as well as the candidates applying for it,
c) That the money invested by third parties towards promoting certain candidates does not motivate an additional political necessity to favour the wishes of these investors.
I'm convinced that the ballot glut (yeah, I said it) just comes from legacied-in small-town thinking that never got the rules update it needs AND the people with a vested interest in keeping things hard to navigate.
A.G.
Never forget: "In any legal dispute the only certain winners are the lawyers". They thrive on dissent, distraction, bent truth, delay & dissembling. They do have their role, but beware!
Wow as an Aussie that just seems crazy to elect a DA??? If that were here all they would need to do and all any one would be bothered about is to promise not prosecute anyone who gets picked up by speed camera??
lol I hadn't thought of that.
I suppose promising not to prosecute anyone speeding would probably get you to lose the election (there would be enough terrified parents for instance), but promising to "increase speed limits on the M1 to 120km/hr" (by not enforcing speed fines below this limit on this road) or promising to "legalise fully-automatic weapon ownership" (by not enforcing bans) do seem like bizarrely influential promises that you could make with no oversight.
I don't understand who contributes what in my local LGA election for councillors.
Local state and federal is all you need. This is silly. Hire the most qualified to look after the water
In the U.K. our Supreme Court is completely independent from government. They are very happy to go at the government if they feel they are breaking the law, such as Rwanda. The U.K. law system isn’t perfect but it is independent from government and I would consider it fair.
Every week, I am bewildered by something crazy or stupid in the States. At least we all get to hide behind their marines and aircraft carriers 😂 'murica
America is collapsing it will not exist by the end of the year. USA is collapsing.
not for much longer
So much for the Doctrine of the Separation of Powers.
If voters need to do too much work to figure out who to vote for, then you won’t have effective elections.
I voted in the elections for Melbourne City Council this week. Unlike every other council, there’s no wards and so you have to choose people across the whole council (my mum lives 15 minutes away and choose between 3 for her ward). We also vote separately for the Lord Mayor and Deputy (11 options). It took me a day and a half to fully research all 58 councillor and 22 leadership candidates, which is way too much time. Most people vote one number above the line which means that party gets to choose all the preferences and ungrouped candidates can’t get first preference votes. Even my boss didn’t vote because it took so long to decide his preferences and he didn’t get to the post box in time. It’s not a good system because people end up guessing, or only choose based of the candidate statements provided and don’t look up their actual policies.
Totally agree.
It's intentional. Nothing will change.
Why can't the district mp also be the local mp? Why not make it a double duty?
I simple system with proper vetting wouldn’t give enough opportunities for corruption.
That's wild, I only had like 6 people
This is a great series, but I find the glut of US elections too exhausting even to listen to.
1.5 weeks to go! And then we're either free of it or in for 4 more years of dreading turning on the evening news to hear what the Bozo in Chief has destroyed today 😅
@@Respectable_Username True, but I'm glad I don't have to elect the local gardener or anything like that.
Thanks for this story, I’ve struggled with understanding how the US has so many elections and elected positions. Makes sense why Americas think being famous or popular is so important, everything is a popularity contest instead of the best person for the job getting it. As an introvert this is my nightmare!
For countries that emphasis separation of powers, it doesn't make sense that judges would be appointed by one or two other branches. That doesn't show separation of powers, but fusion of powers.
For all countries, its hard to have judicial independence if the people appointing the judges are politicians (legislative) or even just the executive.
Electing judges makes sense to me, but I think instead of election, it should be the same way they select juries (voir dire for nonpartisanship) and have them sit for either a case or for a very short term, rotating out jury-judges so the whole bench doesn't leave at once. Also have law clerks to advise the jury-judges who probably don't have legal training.
A very important topic ❤! Democracy is the backbone of the nation's social fabric.
For its proper & judicious functioning,the electorate must be aware of the system & be actively involved as well as the political leaders & others involved must work for the betterment of the people & the nation ! Thanks ❤
Having lived in the US, I can concur with the concepts of this video. Most people don’t have the time or energy to get interested in politics. Voting is not compulsory and gift percent or more, ignore elections completely.
My children (27,19,18,) and I took nearly 2 hours to complete our Nevada Ballot because researching each office / candidate took a lot of time. There are too many on the ballot. But we don’t get to vote smaller, local elections because we are not in America enough. 🇺🇸
Always amazes me how broken the US seems to be at every fundamental level. Its fascinating really.
The key change that America needs to make is to REMOVE the money. Here in the UK, political parties are allotted a set amount of time and caps on campaign budgets based on the size of their party in Parliamentary elections. Given the nature of the culture in the US, maybe local TV stations should be mandated to provide local election coverage and interview candidates? I also think the main point of this is correct in that there are FAR too many elections in the US.
I'm starting to wonder if all of these govt-appointment-by-elections is a defence against anti-tyranny insurrection... which only _might_ work for those elections where the electorate is paying attention.
It's almost as though every city council has asked, "what if the Public hates such-and-such public employee"? "I know! Let's make it the Public's problem!", then added yet another govt position to the ballot.
Too much ice cream. Too much ice cream is destroying America.
Too much democracy.. give me a break - we have an Oligarchy that allows the rabble to make a bunch of noise so long as the continue to act look good cattle the rest for the year.
You're right. If you can't vote for someone or some party that has policies that aligns to your values and ideas and instead have to vote for the least worse option, to vote against someone rather than for someone - or not vote at all - then that is not really a democracy at all.
@@bruceb7464 Yes, it is a democracy. A democracy does not need to pander to special interests ("policies that aligns to your values and ideas") to qualify as a democracy. I would argue the prevelence of special interests in America's pluralistic model makes it a worse form of democracy, more beholden to special/marginal interests, than otherwise. A healthy democracy should end up with a government that reflects the will of the majority, but it should operate to protect the rights of the (reasonable) minority in delivering the policies the majority elected it for. The US presidential election is the opposite of this. A minority elect the president (a few swing states) and there is very little stopping a corrupt president from working only for a minority of vested interests, like Trump did.
@drew3030 our system fails, and is an oligarchy, for the simple fact that it is designed to ensure that 'representatives' are responsive to those that can leverage the most wealth in elections - money doesn't buy votes, it scares elected officials - on purpose.
Real talk! As a halfway politically savvy American this felt like an authoritarian propaganda piece but what do I know? Things went downhill fast after the Citizens United debauchery but big tech put a hammer on the nail imao.
@@5049usrluvtyxso a piece produced by another democracy is propaganda when it shines the light on your failures. Casey is data journalist and holds a Master's degree in Mathematics - your qualifications?
I feel like the question that should be asked is, "Why don't we vote for SCOTUS," and "Why do federal judges get appointed to lifetime positions without being voted on?" Knowing this gets to the reason why women in the US lost a fundamental right that they had for the last 50 years.
A guy running for the water district shouldn’t have to campaign to keep water costs down. He shouldn’t be campaigning at all. But also, maybe, be concerned about safe drinking water instead?
Why this isn’t an appointed position based on experience and past service I’ll never know. We have representatives and executives at federal, state, county and municipal levels, it would be their jobs to appoint theee types of managers
The heart of all this is, unfortunately, opportunity to make money from the positions obtained. Why else would someone dip into their retirement to run for water management?
Short answer, yes. Most of the people they elect should be based on expertise and experience.
21:14 Says it all really. How any society can think a Technical position is best filled by a popularity contest VS real world expertise just beggars belief.
I would however like to know if there are minimum standards required to be on a ballot.
Money is the issue: Corruption is when someone takes money surreptitiously to give an advantage. The American form of bribery is lobbying and buying elections.
Bill Roth! Vote for him. He will serve the people not the machine.
Why. Just… Why? This is stupid and unnecessary.
Great series well done abc
I live in Arkansas, one of nine states that do not even allow write-in candidates. My only choices are what they decide. We can't change the system by voting even if we wanted to.
From my far away perspective here in Britain where we don’t even get to elect our Head of State or upper House of Parliament It’s not so much that there are too many elections, although a good many of them could be better chosen by elected bodies like councils or state legislatures, but it’s the cost... who the hell can fork out hundreds of thousands to get into the city council? Here you’ll probably spend about £200 😂 (which is a good thing)... unless you’re in London and have to pay the ridiculous £10,000 deposit to run for mayor which should be illegal.
Money as a barrier to public office is wrong.
Oh and when it comes to judges and prosecutors... that’s when I’m really against direct election, they should be chosen by a mix of elected officials and other experts in their field by a large consensus as to who is the best for the job, after working to attain a degree for it of course.
I think the deposits help stop a thousand candidates or something, which could intimidate or confuse some people. I do think £10,000 is a bit much though
@ true but you could just raise the signature thresholds- people should be deemed as a serious candidate if they can get the support of a sufficient number of voters to get them onto the ballot, not because they’re able to fork out for it.
Also nice to see a fellow republican here!
@tobeytransport2802 fair
Don’t forget! Election Day is the first Tuesday in November. Except when it’s not. Between the annual election, special elections and primaries, we can have 3-4 elections per year.
After a while I get decision fatigue. Like what do you mean I'm voting for whether school kids get free lunch? Just give the kids lunch. Clean up that river. Make a quick decision so more things can get done.
In Germany, we do have only 4* elections. The national and statewide elections for the respective parliaments and local elections for the city/town council and mayor (depending where you live you either don't have a mayoral election because your city is a state like Berlin or you do have additional local election on the county level). And the mayoral election is the only one where you elect only one person. Our local councils consist mostly out of 15 to 60 members who are elected through party lists and they have the tasks to
* elect and appoint the heads of local bodies like the local DoT
* set prices for the municipal water and waste collection services (the prices for said services have to fund the services to 100%)
* give funding to local school buildings (the teachers are paid by the state)
* and a few more also depending on how large the municipal body is and whether it has cultural or other institutions (like Zoos or theaters)
The mayor is the highest bureaucratic office in a municipality and appoints lower bureaucratic officers
As a former candidate for our city council I was pretty frustrated during our last election because local topics like the housing prices weren't really important for the voters. They asked us about immigration, security or other national topics we cannot work on on municipal level.
The premise of this video is being laughed at in Switzerland so louldy it is going to wake up both the Australians and the Americans…
I think its hilarious that people think judges are non-partisan just because they say and expected to be. Perhaps that is more true among local judges, but the bigger the court the more partisan. The current Supreme Court is overwhelmingly conservative and its obvious.
Why don't we just elect 5 mps for every district and they double as both the local council and represent nationally (or state, if federation)?
The country with governments that happily implement fascism as a 'solution' to what they (incorrectly) deem are problems shouldn't be asking others if they're ok.
America…. You’ve lost it!
As someone who has knocked on doors plenty here stateside, I will tell you that most Americans are friendly and decent when you do so.
We are territorial, though, so the basic arrangement of asking a stranger to align with you ideologically on their own turf is a fraught one.
17:00 So… Does this Nathan Hockmann remind anyone else of Willem Dafoe as Norman Osborn/Green Goblin?
Ridiculous how money determines everything. I wish elections could be centrally / government funded, where everyone running gets the same amount of resources. And the election season is limited to 1 month. I also think there should be no parties, just individuals with their own platforms. I must be naive.
You can’t federalize local issues. All politics is local. I think Aussies thinks municipalities is a foreign thing
No we don’t think that. What we see is an obvious danger in politicising public roles when they ought to be filled by applicants with the best credentials. And when I say we, I mean pretty much everyone outside of the US.
Too much democracy is dangerous.
Yeah, honestly as much as people complain that campaign ads are the reason election year feels too long, they're not far off, it's because the down-ballot races and state constitution amendments are almost worth 2-3 pages in some counties
This is a good video which is why I am a supporter of implementing a parliamentary system with members of the legislatures elected through a closed party list system so that voters can vote for the party that best aligns with their values and those parties will form coalitions with other parties through negotiations to form the government and implement policies on behalf of their voters. But I do believe we should greatly reduce the amount of elected offices we have. For one, I don't think judges, water district people and so forth should be elected offices they should be appointed by the state legislature or the county board of supervisors.
While I think voting for judges is something you could argue for (they are vital after all and sometimes decide over the legality of laws, there are pros and cons), assigning a suitable expert to run the water system is the very same thing I elect a government for... at least where I come from, but America you do you😅
We wouldn’t need so many times voting if we could actually vote out someone when they were horrible. Like people now
Trump isn't president Joe Biden is. He may be old but he's not a sociopath in the pocket of billionaires.
Says you. And who would you replace them with?
@@andrewthomas695 With Herr Trump of course. Who else would those foold vote for?
This channel is from Australia
Missed opportunity not including the major precedence set by the removal of Judge Aaron Persky.
An election is a popularity contest or a slagging contest . If you award a position to someone it will be based on ability.
I live in Australia and my US county's absentee ballot can only be faxed. Can we spend some of that special interest money to get into the 21st century? Most young adults don't even know what a fax is.
Aussie here too - many GP clinics still use fax machines to transfer patient or script info! Completely nuts, considering the fax machine is based on... I think this is correct... a 9.6kbps modem speed :D Welcome to 1991!
What's happening with this video? It keeps going to private. Fourth time I've tried to watch it.
There was a glitch with the original apparently so they had to reupload to fix it
Excellent story, but goodness, you’d think they’d innovate to create more efficient systems of government. All those depressing ads. 😩
Just insane.
Those numbers explain Gascon moves on the Menendez case
Y’all need to come to Las Vegas asap :)
Is this actually real life?
I thought the systems here in Oz were farcical.
Switzerland has direct democracy and is doing fine.
I mean it helps when you have almost a 40th the population 😂
Switzerland didn't give women the right to vote until 1971.
Switzerland has a lot of referenda not so much voting for minor officials like in America. Their population is also a lot better educated and more cohesive.
Does America have too much democracy? No.
Is America okay? No.
No. Not okay. But we haven't been for decades.
Elections and elected positions are not the same as democracy. Democracy comes when the people are the source of legitimacy and have control over aspects of their life through genuine consultation and democratic input. Electoralism may be useed to create a facade of democracy, which I would contend the USA has.
When Alice landed in Wonderland, she was surprised, shocked, and dismayed. She couldn't change Wonderland, so she left. Bye.
Then there are kids in high school who run for class president, etc. Always thought that was weird. (Is USA the only place they do this?)
I don't think it's the voting process it is elf that is the issue. It's the fact that even the most uneducated, ignorant people can cast a ballot for flagrant liars and corrupt parties while the candidates themselves go through little to no vetting. We end up with people who are unqualified for their jobs, elected by others who are totally unaware of what capabilities their candidate even needs to be successful in the position.
That should say "itself" lol
When you rarely allow comments i think not!
Thanks Aunty ^5
Well ... voting for Judges makes no sense ... still, not the most important factor.
Issue with voting is it gives people choices but lets then make the choice arbitrarily. Theres no difference between a vote cast on poor decision making, or selfish motives, or actual rigorious analysis.
On the website in TH-cam summary of programmes can you group videos under themes say US elections so we can find the series easily.
You say this is part 4. I am having trouble finding the other 3 parts
For all programmes including 4 Corners and 7/30 comments section should be opened. It's unfair to have decent programmes but the viewers cannot comment. Freedom to comment works both ways.
You do know that Nevada is going to have a referendum on preferential voting, right?
No wonder Americans dont turn out for presidential elections if they have to fill in all this other BS....or worse...make up an answer.
How does DEI factor into these elections? And if it's so low numbers of people voting then a simple "free lunch" from the richest candidate will win...why would I let Joe Smith who doesn't read a news paper decide on who a judge should be..he has no expertise in the subject lol