India Counted 640 Million Votes In One Day!?

ChromoCast #4
**I realized I didn't clarify that in the US the senate and house determine the NUMBER of electors they are not the electors themselves.

Show Notes:
https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/india-counted-640-million-votes-in-one-day-elon-musk-on-tragic-delay-in-california-results/article68905082.ece

Intro:
-Good opportunity to discuss the philosophical differences between the function of the two systems.
- 640 Million votes in one day and were not supposed to be sketched out by the fact that there are still 300k votes left to be counted half a month after the election?

Discussion
- Outcome and Purpose:
- India’s Electoral College prioritizes proportional representation to uphold the principle of democracy in a parliamentary system.
- The U.S. Electoral College emphasizes federalism and state sovereignty to ensure geographical diversity and prevent the dominance of densely populated urban areas.

1. The Irony of Delayed Results
- Elon Musk -"India counts 640 million votes in one day, while parts of the U.S. struggle to count a fraction of that weeks later."*
- Why do these systems work so differently, and what do these differences tell us about how democracy is structured in each country?
- Are these delays just inefficiency, or are they reflective of deeper structural and cultural priorities?

. Structural Similarities and Practical Differences
- Both systems aim to balance representation with democratic ideals.
- Both rely on intermediary bodies (Electoral Colleges) for electing their Presidents.
- India: Prioritizes efficiency: centralized election authority (Election Commission of India) ensures streamlined processes.
- U.S.: Prioritizes Soveriegnty: Decentralized processes mean each state controls its own election systems, leading to variability in speed, accuracy, and procedures.

2. Philosophical Differences Between the Systems
- India: Reflects a parliamentary democracy where proportional representation aligns with its population’s diversity.
- Votes in India's Electoral College are weighted by population, meaning more populous states and regions have greater influence.
- This system is more directly representative of the overall population, as it ensures areas with larger populations have a proportionally larger say in electing the President.
- However, this emphasis on population density offers less protection to smaller or less populous states and communities, increasing the risk of "rule by the majority."

- U.S.: Balances regional diversity in a federal system, emphasizing state sovereignty over pure population-based representation.
- The U.S. Electoral College gives states a mix of population-based electors (House representation) and state-based electors (Senate representation).
- Smaller states benefit from disproportionate representation, ensuring rural and less populous areas maintain significant influence in presidential elections.
- This design creates a hedge against majority rule, where the interests of urban centers could otherwise overshadow rural communities.

- India’s System:
- Philosophical trade-offs:
- India focuses on speed and centralization in its vote-counting process, prioritizing efficiency and inclusivity in one streamlined system.
- Provides a more accurate reflection of the population's overall will.
- Sacrifices the ability to protect less populous states or regions from being dominated by majority populations.

- U.S. System:
- The U.S. system prioritizes checks and balances through federalism, which can lead to localized autonomy but slower results.
- Ensures regional diversity and minority protection by amplifying the voice of rural states.
- Can result in outcomes where the national popular vote does not align with the elected President, reflecting a trade-off between federalist principles and pure democratic representation.

4. Why Delays in the U.S. Matter
-Broader challenges: effects of COVID election changes that were made permanent in many states, decentralized systems (non-uniform changes to election procedures state-by-state), mail-in ballots, and litigation.
-Are delays like these caused by changing and opaque election procedures in some states eroding trust in the system, especially when juxtaposed against a country like India managing over half a billion votes in one day?

5. Broader Implications and Takeaways
- India’s system is more efficient and representative of population size
- The U.S. system is deliberately slower and more complex, offering protections for minority voices ( rural communities)
Should the U.S. adopt a national standard that state election boards must meet for greater efficiency, or does the largely unregulated decentralized approach ultimately protect against national-level corruption and authoritarianism?