MEDIATION AND POST-ELECTION LITIGATION the approximately 25,00071 state and 60072 federal court judges in the United States lack specific .expertise in election law. Many election law cases involve matters of first impression that must be resolved quickly in the context of intense partisan conflict-a pressure-filled circumstance judges rightly abhor. For these reasons, resolving post-election disputes in court is not always optimal. Although litigation has its place, the next section explores ways in which mediation might, in certain instances, play an important role in alleviating pressure on courts to resolve post-election disputes. V. THE PROMISE OF MEDIATION IN POST-ELECTION DISPUTES As a general matter, mediators are trained to guide parties through disputes in ways that make the dispute resolution process more efficient and the outcome more solid. Mediators are trained to help open channels of communication, to facilitate the process of direct negotiation, to help parties understand and frame their dispute, and to act as an agent of reality in instances where parties may have an inflated sense of the strength of an argument.7 3 Mediation is effective because mediators can assist parties in solving problems "more integratively, at less cost, with greater party participation, and with the possibility of preventing ... some disputes."7 4 Whether these generally accepted benefits of mediation have application in the post-election context hinges on two central variables: first, the nature of the post-election dispute at issue; and second the style of mediation employed. the William & Mary Law School, to form the Election Law Program to help address this problem by creating resources for judges on election law. See ELECTION LAw PROGRAM, http://www.electionlawissues.org. 71 Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, State Court Organization (2004), available at http://bj s.ojp. usdoj .gov/content/pub/pdf/sco04.pdf. 72 U.S. Courts, Judicial Facts and Figures 2009 (2009), available at http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/Statistics/JudicialFactsAndFigures/2009/Table I 0 l.p df. 73 JOHNW. COOLEY, THEMEDIATOR'SHANDBOOK30-31 (2d ed. 2006). 74 Carrie Menkel-Meadow, The Lawyer as Problem Solver and Third-Party Neutral: Creativity and Non-Partisanship in Lawyering, 72 TEMP. L. REv. 785, 802 (1999). 341 HeinOnline -- 27 Ohio St. J. on Disp. Resol. 341 2012