Essay Example on Caucus: A Time-Consuming Process for Registered Voters

Introduction

Caucuses are meetings that are held locally by voters at the end of a session for a specific candidate. After voting, citizens move to nominate conventions whereby political parties choose a nominee to unite the other people (Klonsky, 2008). Caucus is a process of collecting and communicating information from the primaries. It is a more time-consuming process for registered voters. Party leaders have an influencing spirit in a Caucus setting. The people engaged in Caucuses are learned, influential, and affluent in the field of political science. Caucusing takes longer to train when compared to a closed primary neighborhood. It is different, and fewer people participate in caucus when compared to voting in a closed primary. The inclusion of minority groups in Caucuses in the U.S. has not been achieved (Israel, 2016). The assignment comprises a discussion of how anti-democratic the process of American caucus is towards the disabled, minorities, deaf, and women. The aim is to show how the Caucuses in America are undemocratic and the effect to oppress women in taking part openly in the system and difficulties faced by the disabled and minorities in participating in the American Caucus system when compared to the closed primary.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The Undemocratic Nature of the American Caucus System

As stated earlier, the process of the American Caucus is undemocratic as it takes more time to complete the Caucus process that voting in the primary. The participation of people becomes limited in the Caucus process than in a closed primary. Sometimes, in Caucuses, voters are required to share their choice with neighbors before making a final decision. According to Israel (2016), Caucuses are undemocratic, and they are not the best choice to give people a voice when electing a candidate in a party process. Caucuses are known to disadvantage the disabled, parents with children as well as working people.

How the American Caucus System is Undemocratic to Women, the Disabled and Minority Groups

The Caucus system requires people to share their choice of candidate with neighbors. Due to the preferences of spouses, women are influenced to make a different choice of a presidential candidate other than the one they may have preferred. Women also get social pressure that affects their inability to take part in the American Caucus system. Due to the nature of their work, women in evening shifts cannot get time off from their workplace to participate in Caucuses (Israel, 2016). Not only women are excluded in the Caucus process, but the minorities and disabled also find themselves left out during the voting process. The disabled and minority groups are also influenced to choose by their relatives or those helping them during the candidate selection process. The slowness, confusion, and error-riddles Caucuses only encourage the participation of enthusiastic candidates. The interests of minority groups, including women, are not addressed in the American Caucus system (Minta & Sinclair-Chapman, 2013).

The Closed Primary is better than a Caucus

In the closed primary system, women are provided with ample voting time, and their voting rights are also respected. The minorities and people with disabilities also face difficulties in participating in the American Caucus system when compared to the closed primary. The Caucus system is a private event and run by political parties (Israel, 2016). The closed primary is not a private event. Candidates are chosen through a secret ballot even though only those registered with the party can vote (VOA News, 2016). Like other primary elections, the closed central system allows people to register on the same date of voting. Those who cannot arrive at the ballot box are allowed to vote through online platforms and email. Therefore, voters have a more exceptional ability to choose the eventual winner in a closed primary better when compared to the Caucus system (Bump, 2015).

There are low turnouts in the Caucus system as many people, such as the working women and disabled are unable to arrive in the meetings at the prearranged time. Other disabled and working people have to leave the Caucus process earlier due to their inability to sit or wait for long hours. Deaf voters cannot understand fellow participants in caucus, thus requiring translation or captioning, which may not be available. That shows how difficult it becomes for people with disabilities to participate fully in the American Caucus process (Belt, 2016).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the American Caucus process is anti-democratic to women, minorities, and the disabled. The Caucus system requires the attendance of the participants to vote during the meeting. It requires sitting or standing long hours that may not be favorable to all voters, especially women with children, working ladies, and the disabled. Alienating workers and the inability to cater to the needs and interests of voters with a disability and minority groups make the American Caucus process anti-democratic. These challenges limit the capacity of the various groups to participate fully in the voting process. The closed primary system is flexible and meets the voting needs of women, the disabled, and the minority through the settings option of voting.

References

Belt, R. (2016). Caucusing with a disability. Stanford University. Retrieved from https://law.stanford.edu/2016/04/05/caucusing-with-a-disability/

Bump, P. (2015). Why primaries are better than caucuses. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/04/20/why-primaries-are-better-than-caucuses/

Israel, J. (2016). America is supposed to be a democracy. So why do we still have caucuses? Think Process. Retrieved from https://thinkprogress.org/america-is-supposed-to-be-a-democracy-so-why-do-we-still-have-caucuses-ffbbdf32caf9/

Klonsky, J. (2008). The Caucus System in the U.S. Presidential Nominating Process. Council Foreign Relations. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/caucus-system-us-presidential-nominating-process

Minta, M., & Sinclair-Chapman, V. (2013). Diversity in Political Institutions and Congressional Responsiveness to Minority Interests. Political Research Quarterly, 66(1), 127-140.

VOA News. (2016). How U.S. presidential caucus, the primary process works. Retrieved from https://www.voanews.com/usa/how-us-presidential-caucus-primary-process-works