I. Criteria for of Free Elections

            A. Inclusiveness: the electorate is large, perhaps "universal"

            B. Contestability: there is (legally) "free entry" of contestants [candidates and/or parties]; all elections are at
                                       least potentially competitive (and most are actually competitive)

            C. Fairness
                        1. to voters: voters are not coerced to vote in a particular way [protected by secret ballot]
                        2. to contestants: "reasonable" access to electorate and media [with much difficulty in specifying what
                                      this means
                        3. to both: ballots are counted honestly and competently; votes cannot be bought and sold
                                              [also protected by secret ballot]

            D. Governing: elected official have real governing powers
 
            E. Periodicity: there is always a next election

II. (Actual or Claimed) Benefits (and Costs) of Free Elections

            A. Liberalism (William Riker, Liberalism Against Populism) or "defensive" benefits: elected government
                            are "nice" to citizens (maybe sometimes "too nice" - don't raise taxes, cut benefits, etc.)
                        1. precludes "classical tyranny" and general (or "random") oppression
                        2. problem of "factional (e.g., majority) tyranny" remains
                                    a. absence of highly salient stigmatic divisions in population (especially one producing a
                                                       "majority" faction)
                                    b. multiple crosscutting divisions producing social pluralism (Madison, Federalist 10)
                                    c. Bill of Rights, etc.
                                    d. electoral system / "power sharing"

            B. "Populist" (Riker) policy benefits: elected governments embody "will of [a majority of] the electorate"
                        1. elections make government responsive to public opinion
                        2. elections more or less translate public opinion into policy [Riker (and others) deny that elections
                                      can have this effect, because public opinion is (in several senses) incoherent]

            C. Educative benefits: popular participation, engagement, and education

            D. Regular and peaceful leadership transitions

            E. Costs of elections
                        1. money
                        2. disruption
                        3. politicians always "running scared"
                        4. question of optimal election period (term length)