In the U.K. voter registration occurs automatically once a citizen comes of voting age, whereas in the U.S. the initiative resides with the individual. Although innovative techniques such as ‘motor-voting’ have been introduced it is still harder to register to vote in the U.S. than it is in the U.K. In addition, the rules for being allowed to vote in the U.S. are harsher than in the U.K. For example, in the U.K. if you have been charged with a criminal offence, but have served your time then you are allowed to vote again, whereas, in the U.S. if you have a criminal record, you cannot vote, which has come under criticism because it can be seen as anti-black legislation as a higher proportion of blacks have criminal records compared with whites. What is more, the turnout for elections in the U.K. is higher than in the U.S. in general. For example, in 2000, only 50% of those registered to vote actually cast their vote (only 70% of Americans are registered to vote) for the Presidential election, whereas in the U.K. 59% of the population turned out to vote in the 2001 general election.
Another difference between the two election systems is the dates at which the elections occur; in the U.K. the dates of the election are flexible and are susceptible to effective use by the Government, on the other hand the U.S. election dates are fixed and so cannot be manipulated in such a way. Linked to the election dates are the durations of the campaigns in both countries. In both countries the campaigns are flexible, but in the U.K. the duration of the campaigns is much shorter than the election campaigns in the U.S. The average campaign in the U.K. last for approximately three weeks, however John Major’s campaign in 1997 was nearly six weeks long due to the fact that he thought that he was not very sure that he would be elected. In America, in contrast, the campaigns can be months long. This is partly due to the fact that America is larger and there is a greater population than there is in the U.K. and so getting ‘in touch’ with the population requires a lengthier procedure, but I believe the main reason for the difference in campaign times is that in America, the election dates are fixed and so candidates are sure that they are campaigning towards a certain date, while in the U.K. Government calls an election within its five year term and the procedure is much quicker because the election date is on average two months away and so the parties have less time to react and plan.
It is mainly due to the fact that the campaigns are much longer in the U.S. that the cost of the elections is much greater than in the U.K. Wesley Clarke, a front-runner for the Democrat party presidential candidate, recently commented that he estimated the cost of his election campaign, supposing he was nominated as the Democrat’s candidate, would be near to $2 billion. Another reason they are more expensive is that they are more of a spectacle than the U.K. campaigns with greater media coverage, which they must pay for, while the U.K. campaigns have a set number of political broadcasts on the radio and television, which do not depend on finances, and worldwide interest. Moreover, the geography, population and sheer size difference in the U.S. means that it is more expensive to campaign in an American election compared with a U.K. one. The funding for these elections is also important. In U.K. elections there is no public funding whatsoever, it is all private, and there is no limit on the amount of money raised, just on the amount of money spent in each constituency. In the U.S. the funding may be either public or private but not both, however there is a $5000 limit on the contributions coming from one source, which has seen the emergence of political action committees (PAC’s), which act as conduits for channelling more money to one candidate, on which there is no limit on the number of PAC’s giving money to on source.
In the U.K. there is more voting choice than in the U.S. The U.S. is conventionally described as a two party system, which is true in the sense that all members of the senate and the House are either Republicans or Democrats, however, often, in the Presidential contest there are three candidates; Republican, Democrat and Independent such as Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996 and Ralph Nader in 2000. In the U.K. on the other hand there is much debate over whether the U.K. is a two party system or a three party system. Traditionally, the U.K. has been a two party system, but with the growing role of the Liberals, popularly seen as the third party in British politics, there are calls that the U.K. is now a three party system, and there are more than two parties in parliament.
In conclusion, there are many small differences between the two elections, however, the fact that they are both FPTP systems of election means that the underlying principle behind the elections are both the same.
