by



Color Legend:
Violet refers to countries with exceptional electoral systems
Red refers to countries with very satisfactory electoral systems
Orange refers to countries with unsatisfactory electoral systems
Green refers to countries with failed electoral systems
Black refers to countries with completely failed electoral systems
Gray refers to countries with transitional electoral systems
Blue refers to countries without a FDA electoral fairness audit

FDA’s Methodological Assumptions

A-Z Country Listing

Revised 2012 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Report on Venezuela

by
Nicolas Maduro, President Chavez's chosen successor, wins Venezuela's April 14, 2013 Presidential election

Nicolas Maduro, President Chavez’s chosen successor, wins Venezuela’s April 14, 2013 Presidential election

Revised as of April 15, 2013. Revision number 1.

Executive Summary

The Venezuelan federal electoral system is very satisfactory as determined by the overall audit score of 78.83 percent (out of 100 percent). The FDA auditors measured

  1. one unsatisfactory passing score for legislation pertaining to electoral finance (52.5 percent);
  2. one very satisfactory score for legislation pertaining to candidates and parties (77.9%);
  3. two exceptional scores for legislation pertaining to media election coverage (100 percent) and voters (84.9 percent).

The FDA audit focused on 52 variables, and it utilized matrices, financial analysis, and scoring scales. The most notable areas of the system are Venezuela’s commitment to complete and balanced election coverage, thereby supporting a fair playing field for candidates and parties, and a commitment to people’s right to vote and the act of voting through various innovative and progressive measures. However, electoral finances of candidates and parties are only transparent to the state, and there are no direct caps on campaign contributions and no direct limits on expenditures. The lack of public financial transparency creates the potential for pro-government parties to pursue corrupt financial practices and leave anti-government parties subject to unjust assessments of their finances including targeting their contributors. The lack of caps and limits on electoral finances may create an unfair playing field in the realms of billboards, flyers, posters, and campaign events, because these media are not covered by the complete and balanced coverage requirement. The FDA has no evidence of electoral financial wrongdoing, as does no one else, because only the Venezuelan State through the National Electoral Council is privy to party finances. The FDA recommends reforms that will bring about public electoral finance transparency, caps on campaign contributions and limits on campaign expenditures. If implemented these reforms would make the Venezuelan electoral system a model for the rest of the world. As it stands, these limitations have the potential to allow for corrupt financial practices and create unfair playing fields for candidates and parties.

Overall the FDA recommends that the public get continuously and actively involved with the government legislative process and implementation if they want to protect and advance their democratic voice, and create a society of their choosing.

FDA Media Advisory on Venezuela

Downloadable 2012 FDA Report on Venezuela
Continue reading →

2013 FDA Process Review of the Bingham Crossing Development Application

by

rocky view1Executive Summary

The Foundation for Democratic Advancement (FDA) measured severe deficiencies in the Alberta municipal processes with regard to the Bingham Crossing development application. The FDA measured both individual and cumulative impacts of the Alberta municipal processes on the democratic welfare of Rocky View County residents and users of the area. Although the individual effects were in some cases insignificant, the accumulation of these impacts raises questions about the consistency of the Alberta municipal processes with a free and democratic society. The FDA determined that overall; the municipal processes give a greater voice to special interests over the voice of the citizenry. In addition, the FDA identified municipal processes that unreasonably limit the democratic rights of citizens and do not include adequate offsetting mechanisms; and are therefore in conflict with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The FDA concludes that the Bingham Crossing development application requires an inspection by the Alberta Municipal Affairs Minister and a provincial government-initiated referendum to determine whether this controversial development application should pass or fail. The purposes of the referendum are to compensate for the deficiencies in the Alberta municipal processes and accurately measure the voice of the Rocky View electorate concerning the Bingham Crossing development. In addition, the FDA recommends amendments of the Alberta Municipal Government Act and Local Authorities Election Act. The measurements and findings of this report have implications for all Albertan municipalities. Finally, the report’s overall purpose is to ensure that Albertans become more knowledgeable about the outcomes of Alberta government processes, and can then make decisions that are more informed.

This report is in no way an evaluation of the merits and deficiencies of the proposed Bingham Crossing development.

The FDA recommends that the public get involved with the government legislative process and implementation if they want to protect and advance their democratic voice, and create a society of their choosing.

“If liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in government to the utmost.”
- Aristotle

2013 FDA Process Review of Bingham Crossing

April 22 FDA Public Forum on Alberta’s Municipal Acts

Stakeholder Advisory

Revised 2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Report on the United States

by

us capitolReport revised as of April 11, 2013. Revision number 1.

Executive Summary

The American federal electoral system borders a failed state as determined by the overall unsatisfactory audit score of 54.5 percent (out of 100 percent). The FDA auditors measured

  1. two failing scores for legislation pertaining to electoral finance (48.25 percent) and media election content (42.5 percent);
  2. one unsatisfactory score for legislation pertaining to candidates and parties (57 percent);
  3. one satisfactory score for legislation pertaining to voters (70.25 percent).

The FDA auditors factored in 52 independent variables and used matrices and financial spreadsheets in its calculations and determinations. Based on its measurements, the FDA believes that the American federal election outcomes may not reflect the voice of Americans from electoral districts. The significant legislated unfair competition between American candidates and parties coupled with electoral finance legislation favoring wealthy money interests and media legislation favoring large corporate media and imbalanced election coverage creates a system tilted heavily to special and minority interests, rather than the American people. The FDA believes that reforms are necessary in electoral finance and election coverage in order to help realign the American federal electoral process with Americans as a whole. The FDA recommends, for examples, expenditure limits on congressional candidates and privately funded presidential candidates, caps on independent third-party expenditure, caps on media ownership concentration, and a voluntary media code of conduct during the 60 day campaign period which supports impartial and balanced campaign coverage of all registered candidates and parties.

The FDA recommends that the public get involved with the government legislative process and implementation if they want to protect and advance their democratic voice, and create a society of their choosing.

Downloadable Revised 2012 FDA Report on the United States

FDA Media Advisory on the USA