galbraith17_Jeremy HoganSOPA ImagesLightRocket via Getty Images_US2020vote

美国的民主未来

Jan 7, 2022 James K. Galbraith

奥斯汀—随着1月6日骚乱纪念日的结束，让我们来着眼大局。

2020年美国大选最大的反常之处在于，乔·拜登以多获得700万张选票的优势赢得全国普选，但（在三个临近的州）却以仅差不到43，000票差一点失去选举团，也就是整个选举。仅在加利福尼亚一州，拜登就比获胜所需多赢得了500万张选票，而另外多赢得的200万张选票则在纽约。

本世纪迄今为止，在全民普选和选举团选举中均赢得决定性胜利的仅巴拉克·奥巴马一人。 2000年和2016年，普选的获胜者都在大选中失利。2004年，最后的选举结果仅靠俄亥俄州这一个州来决定。上述异常现象不仅持续出现，而且符合宪法，这实际带来了无法解决的矛盾。

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world’s leading thinkers, including long reads, book reviews, topical collections, short-form analysis and predictions, and exclusive interviews; every new issue of the PS Quarterly magazine (print and digital); the complete PS archive; and more. Subscribe now to PS Premium.

James K. Galbraith

Writing for PS since 2015
29 Commentaries

James K. Galbraith, Professor of Government and Chair in Government/Business Relations at the University of Texas at Austin, is a former staff economist for the House Banking Committee and a former executive director of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress. From 1993-97, he served as chief technical adviser for macroeconomic reform to China’s State Planning Commission. He is the author of Inequality: What Everyone Needs to Know (Oxford University Press, 2016) and Welcome to the Poisoned Chalice: The Destruction of Greece and the Future of Europe (Yale University Press, 2016).

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 4 Comments on this article

Martha Hill Jan 13, 2022

Thank you for articulating "US democracy in peril" so well. Republicans are terrified they may lose again in 2024. That's why they are arming themselves for another attempt to a coup d'etat.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ben Leet Jan 10, 2022

The Job Quality Index (dot com) shows for December 2021 that "production and non-supervisory workers" are separated into high wage and low wage workers. 45% (46.6 million) earn an average of $64,100/year, and the low-earning 55% (56.8 million) earn $32,828/year, almost half what the high earners make. The index begins in 1990, it shows the gap widening between low to high, they used to be about 50-50, and the pay gap was less. We are becoming a low-income work-force. These are 103 million full-time year-round non-supervisory workers. Temps and partial year workers, about 30% of all workers, make less, about $19,000/year shows a Brookings report of 2018. The Brookings study leaves out 16% of workers who earn every little, less than $10,000/year. Many studies, and I choose the ALICE study by United Way charity, show about 40% of households are struggling to pay for essential goods and services. The recent US Census report, the Pulse Survey (deciphered at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, "Tracking the Covid-19 Pandemic") show that 28% in Nov. 2021 were unable to pay for basic needs. A Robert Wood Johnson with Harvard Univ. report states that 38% of households have spent-down their savings reserve, up from a pre-pandemic 19%, Oct. 2021. The EPI Economic Policy Institute has multiple studies, one titled "The New Gilded Age" says that 58% of growth went to the top 1% between 1979 and 2017, (page 12 of the pdf version). What's my point? We are not a group of happy campers. The Job Quality Index shows that average wage income for PNS workers has increased by 20.78% since 1990, the Fed's FRED graph shows "Real GDP per capita" has increased by 56.5%, same period. White males did not like Hillary C., but they switched back for Biden. Inequality was decisive in the 6 swing states. Galbraith's inequality studies are very helpful. My blog: Economics Without Greed, Part Two, http://benL88.blogspot.com
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Griesbach Jan 9, 2022

Elections are nice to have, but the evidence also demonstrates that voters have virtually no impact on policy.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.