Fed on a steady diet of negative campaigning and faced with a sinking economy, a pending war in Iraq and heightened crime rates, Americans report feeling underwhelmed by the prospects for Tuesday's mid-term elections. Some pollsters have even likened the 2002 elections to watching grass grow.

Yet the elections are more than a "campaign about nothing." Recent developments, including the tragic death of Minnesota Democratic Senator Paul Wellstone, have made clear that Tuesday's midterm elections are pivotal in charting the course of domestic priorities and foreign policy.

This year, voters will determine whether one party will dominate all three branches of government - a markedly unbalanced political chemistry not seen in over seventy years. A one party state, political analysts note, would perilously jeopardize our revered system of checks and balances.

• Party control of the House and Senate is up for grabs.
  
  
• Should Democratic Senator Jean Carnahan be defeated in Missouri's special election, Senate Republicans will enjoy a slim majority - and thus a November-to-January lame duck session allowing the ushering in of a long-deferred conservative wish list.
  
  
• A Republican Senate would likely stack the thirteen circuit courts of appeal with conservative judges.

Meanwhile, President Bush has signed the Help America Vote Act aimed at avoiding the kind of gut-wrenching election disputes that characterized his own ascendancy. The act, which won't go into effect until 2004, will funnel nearly $4 billion to states to modernize equipment and procedures.

What's at stake this November? Is the American electorate apathetic, as many pundits have claimed? Or are Americans wary of outdated voting systems, redistricting schemes, and bitter campaigning that orphan their votes and sour their political appetites? What reforms are needed that count every vote, allow for real representation, and reflect the growing diversity of America's social fabric?