As Americans, we like to imagine our democracy as robust, responsive, and ringed with transparent institutions. Election Day epitomizes this ideal: regular, inclusive, decisive. But for many, the reality is chillingly different. Beneath the formalities of voting lie structural distortions: gerrymandered maps, executive power grabs, and entrenched elites that ensure actual power systematically diverges from popular will. This is not a tired complaint from the fringes. It’s the reality of a procedural democracy: regular elections, yes, but outcomes skewed toward entrenched minority interests. Here’s why today’s American election system looks democratic, and increasingly functions as anything but.
Proceduralism vs. Participatory Democracy
The United States epitomizes what political scientists call a procedural democracy, electoral mechanics in place, but substantive power still concentrated in elite hands. While ballots are cast, policy is made in corridors far from voters: through campaign contributions, opaque appointment systems, and court decisions. Scholars distinguish this from participatory democracy, where political power truly responds to broad public engagement. The illusion of democracy becomes especially potent when basic processes, like holding elections, remain intact while the substantive influence of the median voter erodes.
Popular Disconnection
One emblematic example: the Electoral College. Twice in the 21st century: 2000 and 2016, the candidate who lost the national popular vote won the presidency. In 2016, Hillary Clinton received almost three million more votes than Donald Trump, yet Trump still took the White House. This system not only diminishes the power of voters in large states but concentrates campaign attention on a few swing states. Large swathes of the electorate, like voters in California or Texas, become background noise in presidential politics.
It’s no wonder polling finds that 63% of Americans favor switching to a system where the national popular vote determines the winner, even if that requires constitutional or interstate compact changes.
Gerrymandering, the Two-Party Duopoly, and Minority Rule
Technocratic malice lives in redistricting. Partisan gerrymanders, targeted maps drawn to lock in legislative majorities, have allowed minorities to maintain majority rule in many states. In states like North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Michigan, Republicans have preserved legislative dominance despite losing statewide vote totals. These maps don’t just shape a single race, they define the candidate pipeline for statehouses, governorships, and Congress.
It’s compounded by America’s first-past-the-post district elections. Fewer viable parties, limited options, and a constant reinforcement of the duopoly fit the predictions of Duverger’s Law: winner-take-all systems produce two dominant parties, stifling pluralism.
Voter Suppression
Democracy is also undermined through bureaucratic manipulation. Voting laws, varying wildly by state, govern ID requirements, provisional ballot handling, counting procedures, and registration rules. These differences enable suppression by design.
Since 2020, election officials have been targeted by disinformation campaigns, threats, and political prosecutions. Project 2025, a conservative policy agenda, openly calls for stripping federal support from election officials and deploying the Justice Department to punish those who certify results viewed as unfavorable. This creates a bureaucratic climate where administering elections becomes risky, and impartiality is penalized.
Executive Overreach
In early 2025, the administration issued sweeping executive orders to rewrite election rules, mandating documentation requirements that tens of millions of Americans may not have, and empowering new agencies to disqualify registrations. These actions conflict with state election laws and fundamentally question the principle that states administer their own elections.
What’s at stake is the undermining of the U.S. federal structure, one entrenched through centuries of elections and legal norms. When the presidency can unilaterally dictate who may vote, the entire democratic system becomes fragile.
Disinformation, Distrust, and Delegitimization
Even when procedures operate, trust erodes. Disinformation campaigns about electoral fraud, amplified by media and elite actors, have warped public perception. While comprehensive investigations after 2020 revealed no widespread fraud, distrust remains high, especially where courts block transparency or allow partisan officials to sit over the election system.
At its core is the delegitimization playbook: undermine faith to justify interventions. When voters expect their ballots to be ignored or distorted, participation drops, and legitimacy evaporates.
Concentrated Power Beyond the Ballot
Democracy is more than voting energy, it’s policymaking. But studies by Gilens and Page show that ordinary citizens have minimal influence on policy compared to elites and special interests. When ordinary voters disagree with wealthy actors, elites typically win. That’s not democracy, it’s oligarchy.
In Congress, courts, election boards, and legislatures, those with financial and institutional access get the outcomes they want. And election mechanics exacerbate that inequality: expensive campaigns, narrow primaries, and uncompetitive districts shut out grassroots candidates.
What Must Change
If democracy exists in name, the path forward is clear: structural reform is essential.
Abolish or reform the Electoral College, ideally via a national popular vote compact or constitutional amendment. Polls show broad public support.
Independent redistricting commissions to end partisan gerrymanders, already in use in dozens of states, and vital for restoring electoral fairness.
Nonpartisan election administration, insulating secretaries of state and election boards from direct political control.
Enforce transparency, ethics, and oversight around electoral regulations and campaign finance. Project 2025’s proposals to raise contribution caps or politicize enforcement underscore why this matters.
Adopt ranked choice and proportional voting in primaries and local races, as advocated by FairVote and democracy scholars, to break the duopoly and encourage broader participation.
Reclaiming Substantive Legitimacy
We can hold elections without being democratic. What matters is whether people feel represented, and whether outcomes reliably reflect their choices. When elections produce predictable minority rule, suppression, cynicism, and elite capture, the system loses its legitimacy.
Public frustration isn’t stage-managed confusion, it’s a recognition that form without substance isn’t democracy. Reformers must move beyond process rhetoric and advocate for substantive participation: honest voting, fair representation, meaningful choices, responsive institutions.
Democracy in Name Isn’t Enough
Yes, America still holds elections. Thousands of polling locations open. Ballots are cast. But the machinery is often rigged in advance, outcomes engineered for elite interests, and power insulated from popular accountability.
If democracy is more than a procedural checklist, then what we call democracy today in the U.S. frequently fails the test: the title sticks, while substance vanishes. That failure is not inevitable. Legislation, activism, citizen education, and institution-building can reverse the trend.
But that demands recognizing the truth: on too many fronts, this is democracy in name only. And until we address the broken system beneath the surface, we’ll never reclaim the kind of self-rule our founding mythology claims, and our citizens deserve.
If you’ve made it this far, you’re clearly someone who values thoughtful critique over surface-level noise.
Join me every Sunday as we dig into the deeper systems behind the chaos, law, politics, power, and how we rebuild what’s broken.
Subscribe now to never miss a piece:
Or click below to share this post on Twitter, Threads, or email; Takes 10 seconds.