Over the last two decades, the United States has invested in promoting
democratization in the former USSR and worldwide. One strategy in this
effort is to argue that foreign governments fail to meet certain
democratic institutional standards.

Recently Russia has answered back. One example may be the Institute
for Democracy and Cooperation, Russia's own democracy promotion NGO.
Whether it has Kremlin connections is for the observer to determine.
Some have argued that the IDC seeks to undermine US democracy
promotion efforts by pointing to examples whereby the US fails to meet
the standards advanced by its own democracy promotion organs.

It's worth noting that prominent US-based democracy scholars also
espouse the view that our behavior is not in line with our
proselytizing. This has been a theme in Larry Diamond's writing for
almost a decade. The point echoes from Robert Dahl's 1971 book
Polyarchy. It was a central theme in a Georgetown-sponsored conference
in December 2007.

One expression of this sentiment is that we would not and do not
recommend any of the following US practices to an emerging democracy:

- malapportionment of legislative districts;
- reliance on all-volunteer, partisan election management;
- use of plurality-rule electoral systems;
- reliance on partisan boundary delimitation approaches;
- the exclusion of minor parties from televised candidate debates;
- and indirect presidential elections by a malapportioned body whose
members have the authority to override the plurality votes in their
respective states.

Bad things happen in Russia to out-party actors that do not happen
here, so Putin's comments need to be taken with a grain of salt. But
the comment raises occasion for thinking. How much authority does our
advice carry abroad when we ignore it at home?

Jack Santucci

On 12/2/10, Jeff Patch <jpatch@campaignfreedom.org> wrote:

Noble democratic reformer Vladimir Putin criticized the U.S. electoral
college [and backhandedly endorsed the National Popular Vote movement?] in
response to WikiLeaks disclosures in which a U.S. official referred to his
regime as "an oligarchy run by the security services."



AFP: "Putin fires back over WikiLeaks criticism"

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/12/02/3082161.htm?section=justin

. Mr Putin rejected the allegations and pointed out that in past US
presidential elections the winner received fewer popular votes but emerged
victorious because of the Electoral College system. "When we are talking
with our American friends and tell them there are systemic problems in this
regard, we can hear from them: 'Don't interfere with our affairs. This is
our tradition and it's going to continue like that.'"



Jeff Patch

Communications Director

Center for Competitive Politics

 <http://www.campaignfreedom.org/contact/> 124 S. West St. | Suite 201 |
Alexandria, VA 22314

p: (703) 894-6824 | c: (202) 527-2598

_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law