糖心传媒淥ne of the greatest threats to democracy is the idea that it is unassailable.糖心传媒�
That糖心传媒檚 the tagline of聽, which neatly sums up the group糖心传媒檚 motivation. Made up of four political scientists糖心传媒斅爋f the University of Rochester,聽听补苍诲听聽of Dartmouth College, and聽聽of Yale University糖心传媒攖he non-partisan initiative set out to monitor democratic practices in the United States and potential threats to those practices.
The group focuses on democratic institutions such as free and fair elections, checks and balances, and freedom of the press. In their of political science scholars and the general public, they糖心传媒檝e discovered reason to be concerned.
Born in late 2016, Bright Line Watch found its raison d’锚tre in the widespread concern over the possible erosion of those institutions in this country, says Helmke.
糖心传媒淥ur goal was to bring what we know as academics糖心传媒攚hat we糖心传媒檝e learned from our scholarly work糖心传媒攁nd bring that perspective to public debates about the quality of democracy in the United States, its vulnerabilities as well as its sources of resilience,糖心传媒� says Helmke.
糖心传媒楽obering results糖心传媒�
There are several factors that the scholarship indicates would protect American democracy, says Helmke, adding that the chances of a complete breakdown of democracy in the US糖心传媒攖he kind that occurred in the 20迟丑听century in parts of Latin America, for example糖心传媒攁re slim.
糖心传媒淎 military coup style breakdown is highly unlikely,糖心传媒� she notes. Scholars who have studied the statistical likelihood of that type of breakdown look at such factors as the relationship between levels of wealth in the US糖心传媒攚here wealth is comparatively high糖心传媒攁nd also the age of this country糖心传媒檚 democracy. Research shows that the age of a given democracy serves to protect it.
Basically, the longer糖心传媒攖he stronger.
But don糖心传媒檛 exhale quite yet, cautions Helmke who notes the group糖心传媒檚 concern about the gradual and slow erosion of democracy in this country. 糖心传媒淭hat process糖心传媒攚here it糖心传媒檚 a slow kind of piecemeal challenging of different institutions that support democracy糖心传媒攊s something that we see in several parts of the world, and something that we are now seeing in the United States today. It糖心传媒檚 very early on so I don糖心传媒檛 know what the long-term prospects are, but yes, I think there are reasons to be concerned,糖心传媒� she says.
Explaining their impetus to be watchful, the scholars write that 糖心传媒渁t a time of potential danger to American聽democratic norms and institutions, it is more urgent than ever for scholars to highlight the risks to our system of government.糖心传媒� That糖心传媒檚 why together they compile quarterly reports, based on careful scientific polling of more than 1,000 political experts and a nationally representative sample of 2,000 members of the public.
The results are 糖心传媒渟obering,糖心传媒� says the team, sounding nuanced alarm bells.
While the public assesses the state of American democracy more negatively than the polled experts, both groups agree that the performance of US democracy has declined since President Trump took office just over a year ago, the quartet concludes in its latest report.
At the core of their regular surveys is a battery of 27 measures, ranging from free speech and an unimpeded press, to constitutional limits on executive powers, to vote representation, and the independence of the judiciary. On 21 of these 27 democratic principles, the survey finds that the experts糖心传媒� rating has declined over time.
For example, 聽finds that more than 80 percent of the polled experts rate US elections free of overt fraud. Yet, fewer than 15 percent of the expert believe that political leaders generally share a common understanding of relevant facts, or think that elected official try to compromise with their political opponents.
The only principle on which the team saw substantial improvement is that 糖心传媒渓aw enforcement investigations of public officials or their associates are free from political influence or interference.糖心传媒澛燭hat statement was first included in Bright Line Watch糖心传媒檚 May 2017 survey, which took place soon after President Trump had fired FBI director James Comey糖心传媒攑rompting a very low initial rating on the principle, the group reasoned. However, the evaluations improved in the third survey. The team ascribes the rising evaluation to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, before again declining somewhat to the present level in the fourth survey. The quartet writes that the survival and independence of the Mueller investigation remains precarious, citing President Trump糖心传媒檚 attempted firing of Mueller in June 2017.
Overall, the political experts rated 13 democratic principles significantly lower, all of them related to institutional checks and balances.聽Bright Line Watch found that the expert judgment in the ability of Congress, the courts, or the Constitution to reign in the power of the executive all eroded by 8 to 10 percentage points. The polled experts糖心传媒� confidence in judicial independence from the elected branches plummeted by 16 percentage points. Results from the general public survey were even more consistently negative.
Why does it matter what the public believes about the state of our democracy?
While experts may have a more acute understanding of certain violations, and conversely, of built-in checks and balances, the public糖心传媒檚 view remains essential.
Why?
糖心传媒淵ou can define democracy in a lot of different ways, but all of those involve a connection between the public and the government,糖心传媒� says Mitch Sanders, who received his PhD in political science from the University in 1997 and now manages the survey methodology for Bright Line Watch. 糖心传媒淪o, understanding what the public sees as important for democracy, understanding what the public perceives as the extent to which the United States is fulfilling or not fulfilling certain standards糖心传媒擨 think that糖心传媒檚 a vital part of understanding democracy today.糖心传媒�
The weakening of democracy, Sanders argues, would be recognized by the public.
Meanwhile, the survey results have not fallen on deaf ears. National media outlets from the New York Times, and Washington Post, to the Wall Street Journal, Vox, and 笔辞濒颈迟颈肠辞听have taken notice, following the group糖心传媒檚 reports closely.
Helmke says her work made her think of a sentence uttered by President Abraham Lincoln in one of his first speeches, given roughly thirty years before the Civil War. At the time, the 16迟丑听President talked about threats to the rule of law and political institutions in the US:
糖心传媒淲e hope all dangers may be overcome, but to conclude that no danger may ever arise would itself be extremely dangerous.糖心传媒櫶切拇綕
