Table of Contents Voter ID LawsGerrymanderingEarly Voting ProgramsConclusionAmerica is a Democracy . It claims to be a place where a free exchange of ideas takes place. For the most part, America offers its citizens both political and individual freedom. There are, however, some minor aspects of the political system that undermine the democratic process in America. Strict voter ID laws, gerrymandering, and cuts to early voting programs are three ways to weaken the democratic process in America. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Democracies are about freedom and equality. A true democratic process implies that power is distributed among citizens. In a true democracy, a certain group of people should not have greater voting power than another group of people. If some votes are discredited or discounted, then it is likely that the democratic process is not genuine or involves some element of deception. American politics is generally fair and equal. On paper, anyone can register and vote. However, the American political system has several deceptive ways for politicians to weaken the political power of certain groups of voters. The tactics usually involve an alternative message to the audience. It would obviously damage the reputation of politicians if they openly stated that they are manipulating legislation in order to suppress political opposition. Instead, they usually cite alternative goals that are not always legitimate. A closer look at policies and data reveals that many of the reasons given are not always realistic, or even a major problem in the first place. Voter ID Laws Voter ID laws are an example of slightly misleading policies. Politicians say they aim to prevent voter fraud. Obviously, most people agree that voter fraud should not happen in a democracy. However, electoral fraud is not a widespread phenomenon. According to a study carried out, there have been only 2,068 cases of electoral fraud since the year 2000 (Bialik). On an annual basis, this number translates to 147 cases of voter fraud per year. This data comes from the entire United States (Bialik). The legislation is meant to address important issues. Although many more cases of voter fraud may go undiscovered, the numbers remain dramatically low. Even elections in small districts have thousands of voters. If a candidate wanted to cheat in an election by paying fraudulent voters, then it would have to be done on a relatively large scale (Parson). The small number of uncovered cases of voter fraud proves that legislative efforts are likely aimed at more than just fixing a minor problem. If voter ID laws aren't actually about stopping fraud, then what good are they? Strict voter ID laws can sometimes be used to suppress the vote of certain groups of people. For example, some strict voter ID laws require multiple forms of identification. Many lower class workers do not have multiple forms of identification. It is possiblethat they have recently moved to the state and cannot afford all the paperwork necessary to obtain another form of identification. In contrast, people from other social classes can usually afford to obtain the required documents easily. Thus, strict voter ID laws affect lower-class people more than the rest of the population. From a political point of view, it makes sense to remove the right to vote of people who are members of the opposing party. The Democratic Party has a high number of minority members. The Republican Party should increase its chances of winning state office by suppressing the votes of minorities who are more likely to vote for the Democratic Party. Swing States are states in which electoral races are close. No political party holds a definitive majority. So swing states would be the best places to use deceptive tactics like voter ID laws. While it is true that some voter fraud occurs occasionally, the number of minorities affected by strict voter ID requirements exceeds the number of potential fraud cases. The data reveals that voter fraud is not a common practice. There are thousands of minorities in different parts of America who would not be able to vote if voter ID laws were made stricter in their district. Comparing this to the small number of cases of voter fraud, it is clear that there is likely a hidden agenda in passing voter ID laws. The real motive is that politicians gain an advantage in elections by preventing a percentage of minority voters from being able to express their political opinions. This practice weakens the democratic process in America. Gerrymandering Gerrymandering is another way in which the democratic process is weakened in America. Gerrymandering is a term that refers to the process of redrawing district lines (Lublin 3). In the United States, votes are divided into winner-take-all districts. This means that if a politician can selectively redraw district boundaries, it is possible to do so in a way that gives their political party a greater chance of winning the next election. For example, if two neighboring districts are split evenly between Democratic and Republican support, a politician could strategically redraw the boundaries. By creating a new constituency that includes a greater percentage of support, it would be possible to gain a political advantage and increase the chances that the candidate or party will win in the next election (Lublin 48). This practice can also be used to weaken the opposition. If the opposing political party has a majority in several large districts, it is sometimes possible to divide those districts into smaller districts that do not benefit from majority control. There aren't many strong arguments in favor of gerrymandering and the redistricting process. It is obviously necessary to redraw district boundaries in some cases when the population changes dramatically. However, it is widely recognized that this practice has been misused by politicians in the past. Democracy is about granting equal voting power to all citizens. If someone lives in an area that has been gerrymandered, then their vote may not count as much as that of someone else living in another district. Thus, gerrymandering weakens thedemocratic process in America. Early Voting Programs Early voting programs are designed to encourage new voters to participate in the democratic process. They typically offer incentives to new voters, such as a shorter line at the polls, the ability to vote before other people, and an overall expedited voting process. One program is called “Souls to the Polls” and aims to encourage voter participation among churches and many African American communities (Gillispie). Such programs are sometimes eliminated in some areas, and this is likely due to an attempt to suppress the political power of minorities. A true democracy consists of getting everyone to express their opinion on what they expect from the government. Early voting programs benefit democracy because they encourage political participation. Programs are being cut in some areas on the grounds that they are unfair. They give new voters a preference in the process and allow them to receive certain benefits that longtime voters are not entitled to. Democracy is also a question of fairness. In some ways, some are right when they claim that early voting programs give new voters an unfair advantage. However, this is a short-term advantage that generally only applies during their first voting experience. If people complain that it's not positive because democracies are about fairness, then those same people should also understand that political participation is another important part of democracies. While these programs give new voters an advantage, they also strengthen the overall democratic process by engaging more voters. The practice of eliminating early voting programs can be used to gain political advantage. Since the programs primarily target minorities and people who are uneducated in the political process, removing them decreases the chances that members of these groups will vote. From a political party's perspective, political advantage can be gained by eliminating early voting programs that would otherwise have resulted in more votes for the opposing party. The evidence that exists to support the idea that certain tactics are used to gain political advantage comes from several sources. In the case of strict voter ID requirements, there are two lines of evidence. One of them is how little voter fraud actually takes place. If the laws were truly aimed at stopping fraud, it is likely that they would have targeted other, much more widespread, forms of fraud. Additionally, there are also a large number of swing states that have voter ID restrictions. If the true goal were to reduce instances of voter fraud, then it is likely that all states, or at least a substantial number, would implement these practices. However, the data reveals that there are high concentrations of strict voter ID laws in competitive states. This indicates that there may be a hidden political strategy behind voter ID laws. The publicly stated goal of reducing fraud may not be the only goal of these policies. The same concept applies to gerrymandering. If some competitive districts redraw lines more frequently than the rest of the country, then it is possible that different reasons justify this redistricting. If the real goal of redistricting was simply to divide very.