Free elections

1.

FREE ELECTIONS
NBU CIVICS

2.

ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT: DEMOCRACY INDEX 2022
Consider these data
from Economist
Intelligence Unit’s
Democracy Index
Full democracies:
Flawed democracies:
Hybrid regimes:
Authoritarian regimes:
Sources: image, data

3.

ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT: DEMOCRACY INDEX 2022
What do EUI’s groups mean? (SOURCE)
FULL DEMOCRACIES: civil liberties and fundamental political freedoms are respected; have a valid system of
governmental checks and balances, an independent judiciary, governments that function adequately, and diverse and
independent media; limited problems in democratic functioning.
FLAWED DEMOCRACIES: elections are fair and free and basic civil liberties are honoured but may have issues (e.g.
media freedom infringement and minor suppression of political opposition and critics); have significant faults in other
democratic aspects, including underdeveloped political culture, low levels of participation in politics, and issues in the
functioning of governance.
HYBRID REGIMES: regular electoral frauds, preventing them from being fair and free democracies; governments apply
pressure on political opposition; non-independent judiciaries, widespread corruption, harassment and pressure on
media, anaemic rule of law; more underdeveloped political culture, lower levels of participation in politics, and issues in
the functioning of governance than flawed democracies
AUTHORITARIAN REGIMES: political pluralism is non-existent or severely limited; often absolute monarchies or
dictatorships, may have some conventional institutions of democracy but with meagre significance, infringements and
abuses of civil liberties are commonplace, elections (if they take place) are not fair or free (including sham elections),
the media is often state-owned or controlled by groups associated with the ruling regime, the judiciary is not
independent, and censorship and suppression of governmental criticism are commonplace.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR A FUNCTIONING DEMOCRACY: FREE ELECTIONS

4.

ELECTORAL RIGHTS TODAY
Various forms of electoral mechanisms – present throughout political history; often – with severe
limitations though...
Today’s ideal: ‘universal and equal suffrage’ (from lat. suffragium = vote), i.e. voting rights for
everyone, regardless of wealth, gender, race, etc.
The road to here is long and complex and covers several distinct stages:
STAGE 1: securing voting rights for all males (=male suffrage)
STAGE 2: securing voting rights for all women on top of (1) (=female suffrage)
STAGE 3: securing voting rights for all ethnic/racial groups on top of (1+2) (=ethnic suffrage)
STAGE 4: securing voting rights for everyone regardless of gender, race, ethnic identity, education, etc.
(=universal and equal suffrage)
States differ regarding the history of this gradual expansion of voting rights:
Some countries – long step-by-step movement from stage 1 to 4 (e.g., the US)
Other countries – all at once (e.g., Finland)
(Here is a comprehensive table with the respective dates for all countries)
Let us have a quick look at the contrasting examples of the US and Finland to illustrate the big
picture

5.

VOTING RIGHTS: THE U.S.
The American constitution (1789) is ambiguous and does
not grant voting rights explicitly; it leaves the question
open to individual states instead:
Article 1, Section 4: ‘The Times, Places and Manner of
holding Elections for Senators and Representatives,
shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature
thereof’
Later on, Amendment XIV (1868) explicitly limited this to
21-year-old males; Amendment XV (1870) explicitly stated
that ‘The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall
not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any
State on account of race, color, or previous condition of
servitude’
In agreement with the Constitution however, various states
introduced severe restrictions in their state constitutions;
e.g. Louisiana (Constitution of 1898), Article 197…

6.

LOUISIANA’S CONSTITUTION OF 1898: ART. 197
‘Every male citizen of this State and of the United States, native born or naturalized, not less than twenty-
one years of age, and possessing the following qualifications, shall be an elector, and shall be entitled to
vote at any election in this State by the people […]’
Sec. 3: ‘He shall be able to read and write, and shall demonstrate his ability to do so when he applies for
registration, by making… written application therefor… which shall contain the essential facts necessary to
show that he is entitled to register and vote, and shall be entirely written, dated and signed by him
The written application (as provided by Louisiana’s Constitution):

7.

LOUISIANA’S CONSTITUTION OF 1898:
LITERACY TESTS
Additionally, Louisiana (as well as other
American states, such as Alabama and Georgia)
introduced literacy tests to filter out ‘unqualified
citizens’
Do you qualify? Try a 1965 test (Moodle,
‘Louisiana literacy test activity’)

8.

LOUISIANA’S CONSTITUTION OF 1898: ART. 197
Sec. 4: ‘If he be not able to read and write…,
then he shall be entitled to register and
vote… if he shall be the owner of property
assessed to him in this State at a valuation of
not less than three hundred dollars…’
In effect, sections 3 & 4 of Louisiana’s 1898
constitution led to eligible black voters
shrinking from 130K (1896; roughly the same
number of white voters) to 5K (1900); by
1910, only 730 black voters were registered
Image source
And what about women, let alone black
women?

9.

VOTING RIGHTS: THE U.S.
WOMEN: It was only in 1920 that the 19th Amendment enacted
full-scale female suffrage:
‘The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.’
RACE: And only in 1965 that the Voting Rights Act explicitly
excluded any restrictions to voting on account of race or colour:
SEC. 2: ‘No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard,
practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or
political subdivision to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the
United States to vote on account of race or color.’
President Lyndon B. Johnson signs the Voting Rights Act of 1965
in the presence of Martin Luther King Jr. and others (image
source)
RECAP: the US are an example of a step-by-step movement
from very limited to universal suffrage, moving gradually from
selected male suffrage to universal suffrage irrespective of sex,
race, wealth, etc.; duration = 1789/1965 = a total of 176 years
WATCH: Dr King’s ‘I have a Dream’ (28 Aug 1963) (Moodle)

10.

VOTING RIGHTS: FINLAND
Unlike the US, Finland did it all at once: it was the first
European country to recognise universal and equal suffrage
19 c. Finland was a Grand Duchy of the Russian Empire
(since 1809); this is what happened:
o Early 20 c.: opposition against the Russian tsarist regime;
Finns demanded a parliament of their own
o Russia had just lost a major war against Japan (1904-
1905), so tsar Nicholas II conceded
o On 20 July 1906, Nicholas II confirmed Finland’s new
electoral law: the Parliament Act of the Grand Duchy of
Finland
o Finland became the first in Europe (and the world!) to give
its women the right not only to vote, but also to stand for
parliamentary elections
o Image: polling station in Helsinki, 1907 (source)

11.

FINLAND’S
UNIVERSAL
SUFFRAGE
Turun lehti (a Finnish
newspaper), title page, 2 June
1906: ‘The Solution is Made’;
the article explains the
parameters of the vote
expansion (from 300K to 1.5M
voters), both men and women
13 of the 19 women elected to
Finland’s Parliament in 1907
(source)