Are the people in charge of running our elections biased?

Paranoia and coincidence; the United States voting system is flawed.

Is your vote worth as much as your neighbors’?

Since the 2016 election, many Americans question the validity of one person, one vote. However, as we approach the 2018 election cycle, Texans are concerned, and could possibly turn out in record numbers to vote, as passions now run high.

In the 2016 election, Donald Trump won more electoral college votes than his opponent, Hillary Rodham Clinton, 324-227, but less of the popular vote, 62 million to 66 million.

Immediately following the election, the debate about one person, one vote raged on in social media and dinner tables all over the United States.

"In a democracy, everyone's vote should be equal to someone else's vote," one person tweeted in 2016.

On its face, one person, one vote sounds like an improvement over old-world voting in which until 1828, only property-owning, white men were able to vote. But after several constitutional amendments and lawsuits, the country became a more equitable representative democracy.

Black men were given the right to vote in 1870 and women of all colors, after many years of coming together in protest, succeeded in getting a suffrage law passed in 1920.

What is hidden beneath the wording of one person, one vote are two major voting rights flaws which are common practice in the current political environment. These flaws are gerrymandering and the action taken by electoral college members known as faithless electors.

Both of these have the possibility to be manipulated in ways that could result in one person’s vote not being equal to another person’s vote.

Some people don’t know about electors in a representative democracy, according to an article by The Washington Post.

Others believe that because of indirect democracies, their vote doesn't make a difference in the presidential election.

Recent turnout in Texas' primary demonstrated an indication of how people may vote in 2018.

"Texas has 15,015,700 voters registered according to a preliminary estimate — over 777,000 more than were registered in time for the March primaries," The Texas Tribune stated.

There were many more people registered to vote in the off-year primary than even four years ago.

Some people believe their vote doesn't count because of gerrymandered districts.

Gerrymandering occurs when the boundaries of an electoral map district are skewed so much by the legislature as to favor one population over another, such as Republicans over Democrats, instead of drawing equally sized, more square-shaped boundaries.

“Republicans have adroitly exploited redistricting, taking control not just of Washington but crucial governorships as well.” The Daily Beast stated. “Can the Democrats find a way to take back some turf?”

"Voters should select their representatives, not the other way around," an article from CNN stated.

People may be turning out in record numbers to vote, however, because of gerrymandered districts, one person from one district's vote may not count the same as someone else from another district.

This problem is being taken up in Pennsylvania right now by way of a lawsuit in the state Supreme Court.

Recent democratic wins in strongly held republican districts have strengthened voter registration drives and encouraged otherwise apathetic non-participants to add their voice and their votes.

Another problem when it comes to one person, one vote is faithless electors.

"The Electoral College consists of 538 electors,” according to federal archives. "A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president. Your state's entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in its Congressional delegation: one for each member in the House of Representatives plus two for your Senators."

Since the founding of the Electoral College, there have been 167 faithless electors. Since 1900, there have been nine occurrences of faithless electors who refused to vote for the person their constituents supported with a majority. This includes one case of a faithless elector abstaining altogether.

An of elected officials not following the majority opinion of their constituents is that 62% of Americans surveyed say they would prefer universal health care but today’s politicians consider the idea of universal health care to be politically impossible, according to a PBS survey.

Another example from the recent past is the issue of net neutrality with practically all citizens against being charged differently for different internet packages, much like cable.

Net neutrality is the principle that Internet providers like Comcast & Verizon should not control what we see and do online. In 2015, startups, Internet freedom groups, and 3.7 million commenters won strong net neutrality rules from the US Federal Communication Commission (FCC). The rules prohibit Internet providers from blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization—"fast lanes" for sites that pay, and slow lanes for everyone else.

Despite the overwhelming support, a majority of internet service providers lobbied elected officials to get rid of net neutrality.