1 of 1

Write now Article Tools

The final step of the inauguration of Barack Obama brings to an end the mammoth task of the US electoral process and it highlights some sharp differences between the US and Australian systems.

In Australia the typical campaign lasts a matter of months and the Voters are usually well sick of the sight of politicians long before voting day. Two years would be far too long for the typical Aussie attention span unless the process had a tie in to football.

The leader of the Party is the person heading for the top job and there is generally no seat shuffling just because an election has been called. Of course the Bob Hawke ascendancy occurred after a General Election had been called by Malcolm Fraser but this was highly unusual and regarded as a big risk at the time. The US idea of standing several people from the same party against each other while the other side take notes of the weaknesses would not appeal.

Muck raking doesn't have much impact these days in Australia. The revelation that Kevin Rudd had been to a girly bar was met with much humor and acceptance in the last campaign. Indeed quite a number of folk thought it would do him good to get out and about. The US seems much more concerned about "matters of the heart" and it appears sexual misbehaviour is more frightening to Americans than religious radicalism. The reverse of the Australian attitude.

The distribution of the top jobs in Australia goes strictly within a party or coalition unless the role is far removed from politics. Foreign Affairs and Attorney General roles are all politicians. The US system seems to aim for the best fit aside from political favors being repaid. This filters right down to community level where even the local sheriff might be elected. In Australia, the preferred option is to have a more consistent service delivery through a State or Federal government.

The idea of electoral votes being included or not based of a judicial decision from a party aligned judge, seems destined for corruption from the Aussie view point. The Australian Electoral Office make the decision here and there is rarely any complaint about their call. This might be in some part due to apathy but it feels safer than the US option.

Finally we come to a huge difference. The attitude towards the successful candidate after an election has been won. In the US the Voters seem to sign on to trust their leader above all else. George W Bush managed to score a 2nd term even when it was pretty clear he was hopeless at Foreign Affairs and Diplomacy. In Australia, the Voters seem to be just counting down to the inevitable failure of an incumbent. In Kevin Rudd's case, there has been an unusually long "honeymoon" of over a year but this will fade with time.

This really encompasses a large difference between the two countries. In America a President can coast along and take it easy while in Australia the incumbent must keep performing. It's a famous saying in Oz politics that usually an election here is lost by one side rather than won by their opponents.

Learn more about this author, Peter Mccarthy.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Comparing the election process: US vs Australia?
We want to hear your view. Write now!