--------
Let us look at the political
system in the United States for signs of corruption. The first problem it faces in being fair and free is interference elections by partisan gerrymandering.
The US ends up with electoral districts like this one:
Canada
has electoral districts determined by non-partisan committees based on
electoral data, natural boundaries, existing communities, and compact
borders. They look like these:
In a province with fewer geographical features, they look like this:
The corrupt redistricting in the US has huge effects on the results of elections. For example, “The Brennan Center for Justice estimates
extreme partisan bias gave Republicans at least 16 to 17 more seats in
the 2016 election, and possibly as many as 29, according to one
analysis. Democrats were 24 seats short of controlling the House of
Representatives.” (Here's how gerrymandering games U.S. elections — and why this Pennsylvania decision matters | CBC News).
The courts sometimes try to redress the corruption (North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map, Pennsylvania top court redraws voting map in boost to Democrats, A Flurry of Courts Have Ruled on Election Maps. Here’s What They’ve Said). Sometimes, the courts have not (U.S. Supreme Court declines to curb electoral map manipulation). This is a worm eating at the heart of democracy.
The second problem is ongoing efforts to disenfranchise voters on partisan grounds (New Voting Restrictions in America).
These include imposing requirements for specific forms of picture ID
and the closing offices in which they can be obtained (e.g. As it turns out ... Bentley's driver's license closures were racial, after all), as well as the closing of polling stations in minority districts (this story is from 2014, New G.O.P. Bid to Limit Voting in Swing States, and this one is from 2016, Opinion | The Voters Abandoned by the Court, and this one is from 2018, Georgia candidates decry plan to close voting sites in mostly black...).
In
contrast Elections Canada (the independent federal agency that runs the
elections) has a mandate to educate the electorate in order to increase
the number of votes.
The third problem is the
transparent and overwhelming influence of money on the American
government’s composition and decisions. I became aware of that in the
lead-up to the “Mickey Mouse Copyright Extension Act,” also known as the
“Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act.” It was an outright gift of an
extra twenty-year monopoly to copyright holders or, to put it
differently, a brazen theft from the public domain. Prior to that act,
there were 10 extensions in 40 years, all timed to prevent the first
Mickey Mouse cartoon from falling into the public domain. Now, even with
a 70 or 95-year term in place, Congress is looking at extending it
again (Congress' Latest Move to Extend Copyright Protection Is Misguided).
This
is just one example, of course. Looking at all the data leads to the
Princeton study that tested whether the United States was better
described as a democracy or an oligarchy. It came down on the side that “oligarchy” was a better description (https://scholar.princeton.edu/si...).
Honestly, though, any research on the influence of the Military-Industrial Complex, pork barrelling (Pork barrel spending on the rise in Congress, watchdog group says),
the Koch Brothers or the Big Pharma lobbies would lead one to the same
conclusion. The endless electoral process from the primaries up to the
election requires endless cash, which comes with substantial strings. In
fact, American “elected officials spend 30-70% of their time in office fundraising
for the next election. When they’re not fundraising, they have no
choice but to make sure the laws they pass keep their major donors happy
— or they won’t be able to run in the next election.” (One graph shows how the rich control American politics).
Whether the legislators are corrupt or the judges, I don’t know, but this is not a good sign of a fair and open government: The West Virginia House impeached the entire state Supreme Court.
In
contrast, Canada has strict limits on personal contributions to
electoral campaigns or parties, and corporations are not allowed to
donate at all. Campaigns are also short. And the government provides
rebates on some electoral expenses to encourage smaller parties to
participate in the election and be heard.
Finally, appointments to Canadian courts, even the highest, are based on qualifications, not politics. (Why Canada's Supreme Court appointments are nothing like America's circus - Macleans.ca; Non-political SCC appointment process a welcome improvement). In most cases, a judge’s politics are not even known.
So,
without referring to any of the measures you reject, I argue that the
United States has a more corrupt political culture than Canada.
