The Growth of General Election as an Implementation of Democracy and Constitution in Indonesia since Parliamentary Democracy Era until Reformation Era

The objectives of this research are (first) to know General election growth as an implementation of democracy in Indonesia specially as an empirical description of General Election since Parliamentary Era until Reformation Era and as an assessment to know whether General election that was executed was democratic or not. This assessment used many indicators as General election order, General election organizer, General election contestant competition, freedom of elector, and controlling of General election. Second, to know the position of General election as Constitution implementation in Indonesia specially from the aspect of General election growth in Constitution and also General election law and causal factor of changing General election law in every General election that is implemented in Indonesia. Third, to give solution in order to make General election perfect in Indonesia governance system. This research use research method consist of normative law research that having descriptive character by using law approach, political approach, historical approach and comparability approach. Data in this research are secondary data with library research as an instrument. The technique to analyse data use qualitative method through categorize problems based on problems that is researched by taking conclusion based on logical idea. The result of this research indicate that General election is fluctuative. The General Election in the Parliamentary Democracy Era is democratic, The General election in Guided Democracy Era is not implementated, The General Election in New Order Era is undemocratic and The General election in Reformation Era is democratic. The growth of General election as Constitution implementation in Indonesia experiences a significant growth since Constitution of 1945, Constitution of 1949, Constitution of 1950 until amandement Constitution (reformation era). In General election law there are items that need to be defended, to be vanished and to be corrected. The basic reasons of changing General election law consist of law aspect, political aspect and sociological aspect. Small part of solution General election in governance system for Indonesian future (postscriptum) are necessity in improvement of General election democratization, necessity in repairing of General election in Constitution and General election law. Keyword: General election, constitution and democrac

The complexity of the California recall election

The October 7, 2003 California Recall Election strained California’s direct democracy. In recent California politics there has not been a statewide election conducted on such short notice; county election officials were informed on July 24 that the election would be held on October 7. Nor has California recently seen a ballot with so many candidates running for a single statewide office (see Mueller 1970). Under easy ballot access requirements, Secretary of State Kevin Shelley certified 135 candidates for the official ballot on August 13^1. In the recall, voters cast votes on (1) whether to recall Governor Davis from office, and (2) his possible successor. These two voting decisions were made independent by the federal district court’s decision on July 29. The court’s decision invalidated a state law requiring a vote on the recall question in order for a vote on the successor election to be counted (Partnoy et al. 2003). The abbreviated election calendar also led to many improvisations, including a dramatically reduced number of precinct poll sites throughout the state and the unprecedented ability of military personnel, their dependents, and civilians living overseas to return their absentee ballots by fax. These problems produced litigation and speculation that substantial problems would mar the election and throw the outcome of both the recall and a possible successor’s election into doubt. In the end, the litigation failed to stall the recall election, and the large final vote margins on both the recall question and the successor ballot seemingly overwhelmed Election Day problems. In this paper, we concentrate on some of the problems produced by the complexity of the recall election, but we do not attempt an exhaustive presentation of these problems. We focus on polling place problems on election day, the problems associated with translating the complicated recall election ballot into six languages, how the long ballot influenced voter behavior, and voter difficulties with the ballot measured with survey data. We conclude with a short discussion of the possible impact of these problems on the recall election

A Vote for Clarity: Establishing a Federal Test for Intervention in Election-Related Disputes

Increasingly, state and federal courts are asked to resolve election-related disputes, as candidates are more likely than ever before to challenge some aspect of the administration of an election in court. Election-related litigation puts judges in the unfavorable position of kingmaker, forcing the court, not the people, to determine the winner of an election. When the court intervenes in an election dispute, the public may perceive the court’s intervention as a political act that decreases the legitimacy of the winning candidate and the election system as a whole. Moreover, research reveals that judicial decision-making at both the state and federal levels can be skewed by party loyalty. Typically, election-related lawsuits are brought in state court because election administration is a matter of state and local control. Occasionally, however, federal courts are called to review an election dispute in which a candidate or voters allege that the administration of the election resulted in an infringement of constitutionally protected rights. While nonintervention is the default in federal court, under certain rare circumstances federal courts have determined intervention to be appropriate. The federal judiciary has never, however, clearly established a test for determining when intervention is warranted. This Note explores the federal courts’ reluctance to intervene in election disputes through the lens of a recent Second Circuit decision: Pidot v. New York Board of Elections. Ultimately, this Note concludes that federal courts should adopt an explicit two-part test to determine whether (1) the state corrective procedure adequately protected the constitutional interests of candidates and voters and (2) nonintervention would result in fundamental unfairness to the voters

Democratic Replay: Enhancing TV Election Debates with Interactive Visualisations

This paper presents an online platform for enhancing televised election debates with interactive visualisations. Election debates are one of the highlights of election campaigns worldwide. They are also often criticised as appearing scripted, rehearsed, detached from much of the electorate, and at times too complex. Democratic Replay enhances videos of election debates with a collection of interactive tools aimed at providing a replay experience centred around citizens' needs. We present the system requirements, design and implementation, and report on an evaluation based on the ITV Leaders' Debate from the 2015 UK General Election campaign

Challenges to Fair Elections 8: Election Day Registration Works

In the final days of the 2006 campaign, as in any election year, citizen interest is peaking as election news--and debates on the issues--becomes more pervasive in the media. Unfortunately for America's voters, in all but eight states (one of which does not require voter registration) , if you are not already registered to vote in this week's election, it is too late. There are seven states, however, where eligible voters are not hampered by arbitrary deadlines, no matter when they become engaged by an election, and can register to vote on Election Day itself. Thanks to Election Day Registration (EDR), also known as "same-day registration," eligible citizens can register to vote on Election Day in Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Wisconsin and Wyoming, each of which offered EDR in the 2004 presidential election. These states boasted, on average, voter turnout that was 12 percentage points higher than in non-EDR states, and reported few problems with fraud, costs, or administrative complexity. Inspired by their example, Montana is implementing a form of EDR this year. In fact, in 2006, 2008 and beyond, one could easily predict where turnout will be consistently higher than the national average--in states that offer Election Day Registration

2010 may not have marked the first ‘internet election’, but digital platforms are of ever increasing importance in political campaigning

Predictions that an upcoming national election will be ‘the’ internet election have been circulating in the UK and other advanced democracies since the late 1990s. Rachel Gibson and Marta Cantijoch study the UK’s general election in 2010 and find that while ecampaigning still lagged behind traditional media and mobilisation tools, there is reason to believe the internet will play a much larger role in the 2015 election and politics more generally