Everything is toxic. It depends on the dose as to when it reaches toxic levels. For sugar, the LD50 is >10,000 mg per kg of body weight. In comparison, caffeine's LD50 is 100 mg/kg and nicotine's is 1 mg/kg. "All things are poison, and nothing is without poison; only the dose permits something not to be poisonous." Paracelsus, the father of toxicology.

So then more power would be concentrated under the judicial branch by giving them the power over politics at the most basic levels. The formation of 3 branches of government was established so that no one branch could control government while power could still concentrate in one branch as has been seen in the past when the presidency under Roosevelt rose to overpower the rule of the legislative branch. I can see no real benefit that would outweigh the enormous costs the would be incurred by initiating a huge expansion of the judicial branch to oversee elections. Plus, I fail to see how moving the power over elections to the federal level would be an improvement over having it at the state level. At the state level, one can still make their voice heard whereas at the national level it is easier to ignore a "call from the wildnerness". If you don't like the way elections are held in your locality, you can easliy lodge a comlaint with the election commissioner. If that doesn't satisfy you, go higher to the county board or the State Atourney General. The way you propose is very remiscent of voting systems in countries where voting is mandatory and a freely excercised right. While the system we have doesn't always work the best all the time, I'd say it is much more preferred to a system that is highly regimented and overseen by some kind of overreaching Byzantine bureaucracy in a faraway location that makes it insular from the people.