Voting Rights and Responsibilities
Tuesday was election day. It wasn't big E, big D, Election Day, but it was still a day for some people to go out and vote. I'm not gonna get into the politics of who won and who lost. But I do have something of an idea that might make it a little more meaningful when we do have the little E and D election days.
Big E big D Election Day shows up on every calendar in the United States. It's routine, like any holiday. It is the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. It shows up every November. But mainly it's remembered every two years, when you have a bunch of members of the House and/or Senate up for election in your individual state/district, or its presidential election time.
Little E little D election day is usually on a Tuesday too, and rarely has much of anything directly to do with those national level figures. They're off-cycle elections, special elections (the latter term being to "official" one used most often). You usually have only local people up for election; county commissioners, mayors,city council... those sorts of people. Occasionally, or more common in some places in recent years, you get state and national figures up in recall elections.
Partly because of that, you tend to have limited turnout. By limited, I mean abysmal. I haven't had a chance to review the exact numbers of last Tuesday's elections in New York, Colorado, and elsewhere, but I can recall a locality a few years ago in which in a city of more than a quarter million, turnout for a mayoral race was something like under 1000. I will admit that I am culpable in not always turning out for local elections as I really should, especially given my attentiveness to political matters.
Clearly, however, when you have that many people not show up to vote, there MUST be something else wrong. However, because of the limited turnout of non Election Day election days, most often you see as many elections and ballot initiatives packed onto the November date. The problem you get there is what you saw in Florida and many other places last November where there's so much stuff packed into the Election Day ballot that it takes a seeming eternity for people to fill them out, making for unbelievably long lines, and people waiting hours to vote.
Turnout is important for one reason - we do live in a democracy. When you wake up in the morning to go to work and there's traffic all over the place, streets blocked by construction, you usually don't get to just say, "screw it, I'm not going to work today". You usually pick the best road, negotiate it, and hope that traffic is better tomorrow, and that construction wraps up soon. But that is how many people treat voting. They look at the political landscape, perceive a bunch of bad choices, and say, "screw it, I'm not gonna vote".
There isn't much that can be done about those people. They are quitters. They don't have the personal fortitude, wherewithal, or logical acuity to reason their way to making a choice among not so great choices. I have no reservation of saying so because if you make no choice, you don't get to complain. There are always bad choices. You make the least bad one. If you can't figure out which one that is, then I feel bad for you, but you have limited room to complain about the outcome. If I don't vote in an election, then I can't complain about what happens afterwards.
Many more people, however, simply forget. The big Tuesday in November is easier to remember than the little one that doesn't usually get too much attention. There usually isn't the big money spending by candidates on ads, not the constant drumbeat of of phone calls, or people at the door. You may be cognizant of it, but simply don't remember it once the day actually rolls around.
There's a number ways to help this.
First, you could stop diminishing the number of days people can vote. Schemes such as cutting early voting, stopping people from voting by mail-in ballot, stopping students from voting when they live on campus, and all this voter suppression nonsense, has to stop. Democracy requires maximum participation. Stop trying to invent ways to make people ineligible.
Second, mandate that a mailer goes out for all elections. I believe that most election offices in the nation, if not all, send out a sample ballot to all eligible voters for the big November day. I think they should do that for all elections. Similarly, the election offices should develop an e-mail system, allowing them to e-mail the same sample ballots and/or reminders to vote for all elections, not just the ones on Election Day.
Finally, there should be a quorum. In the House, Senate, State House, State Senate, City Council, County Commission, and most voting bodies, there is the requirement of a quorum - a minimum number of voting eligible participants who must be present and vote. Sometimes it's as little as 50%+1. Sometimes it's much higher, like 90%. But I think there should be a standard quorum for all elections, requiring a minimum number of voters to show up and vote, or mail in ballots and vote, before a result is deemed valid. If there aren't enough votes, you just redo the election.
I think this one is significant as it diminishes the efforts some have taken to try to limit voter turnout. Certain populations are less likely to turn out to vote for various reasons, and those people tend to align more strongly with a particular party. Placing more obstacles to voting is a sure way of influencing who actually turns out to vote. Instilling a quorum in all elections would help to diminish these efforts.
Obviously the cost of these options are not to be ignored. It may not seem like it at first blush, but there is a significant cost that goes into holding elections. However, the outcome of an election is of even greater importance and can have much more significant, much longer standing, intangible costs connected to it. These suggestions also fall short of the alternate path taken by at least one nation I know of, wherein voting is legally required, as in you get a fine for not voting if you are eligible to do so.
Turns out that particular nation has one of the highest satisfaction rates with their political system of any democratic nation. Guess why? Because everyone participates. There are very few who do not have a personal stake in the outcomes at every level because they take part in that process. There are other components to it as well, including how elections are funded, but turnout is the most immediate way that we can influence and improve the system. Just some food for thought.
Big E big D Election Day shows up on every calendar in the United States. It's routine, like any holiday. It is the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. It shows up every November. But mainly it's remembered every two years, when you have a bunch of members of the House and/or Senate up for election in your individual state/district, or its presidential election time.
Little E little D election day is usually on a Tuesday too, and rarely has much of anything directly to do with those national level figures. They're off-cycle elections, special elections (the latter term being to "official" one used most often). You usually have only local people up for election; county commissioners, mayors,city council... those sorts of people. Occasionally, or more common in some places in recent years, you get state and national figures up in recall elections.
Partly because of that, you tend to have limited turnout. By limited, I mean abysmal. I haven't had a chance to review the exact numbers of last Tuesday's elections in New York, Colorado, and elsewhere, but I can recall a locality a few years ago in which in a city of more than a quarter million, turnout for a mayoral race was something like under 1000. I will admit that I am culpable in not always turning out for local elections as I really should, especially given my attentiveness to political matters.
Clearly, however, when you have that many people not show up to vote, there MUST be something else wrong. However, because of the limited turnout of non Election Day election days, most often you see as many elections and ballot initiatives packed onto the November date. The problem you get there is what you saw in Florida and many other places last November where there's so much stuff packed into the Election Day ballot that it takes a seeming eternity for people to fill them out, making for unbelievably long lines, and people waiting hours to vote.
Turnout is important for one reason - we do live in a democracy. When you wake up in the morning to go to work and there's traffic all over the place, streets blocked by construction, you usually don't get to just say, "screw it, I'm not going to work today". You usually pick the best road, negotiate it, and hope that traffic is better tomorrow, and that construction wraps up soon. But that is how many people treat voting. They look at the political landscape, perceive a bunch of bad choices, and say, "screw it, I'm not gonna vote".
There isn't much that can be done about those people. They are quitters. They don't have the personal fortitude, wherewithal, or logical acuity to reason their way to making a choice among not so great choices. I have no reservation of saying so because if you make no choice, you don't get to complain. There are always bad choices. You make the least bad one. If you can't figure out which one that is, then I feel bad for you, but you have limited room to complain about the outcome. If I don't vote in an election, then I can't complain about what happens afterwards.
Many more people, however, simply forget. The big Tuesday in November is easier to remember than the little one that doesn't usually get too much attention. There usually isn't the big money spending by candidates on ads, not the constant drumbeat of of phone calls, or people at the door. You may be cognizant of it, but simply don't remember it once the day actually rolls around.
There's a number ways to help this.
First, you could stop diminishing the number of days people can vote. Schemes such as cutting early voting, stopping people from voting by mail-in ballot, stopping students from voting when they live on campus, and all this voter suppression nonsense, has to stop. Democracy requires maximum participation. Stop trying to invent ways to make people ineligible.
Second, mandate that a mailer goes out for all elections. I believe that most election offices in the nation, if not all, send out a sample ballot to all eligible voters for the big November day. I think they should do that for all elections. Similarly, the election offices should develop an e-mail system, allowing them to e-mail the same sample ballots and/or reminders to vote for all elections, not just the ones on Election Day.
Finally, there should be a quorum. In the House, Senate, State House, State Senate, City Council, County Commission, and most voting bodies, there is the requirement of a quorum - a minimum number of voting eligible participants who must be present and vote. Sometimes it's as little as 50%+1. Sometimes it's much higher, like 90%. But I think there should be a standard quorum for all elections, requiring a minimum number of voters to show up and vote, or mail in ballots and vote, before a result is deemed valid. If there aren't enough votes, you just redo the election.
I think this one is significant as it diminishes the efforts some have taken to try to limit voter turnout. Certain populations are less likely to turn out to vote for various reasons, and those people tend to align more strongly with a particular party. Placing more obstacles to voting is a sure way of influencing who actually turns out to vote. Instilling a quorum in all elections would help to diminish these efforts.
Obviously the cost of these options are not to be ignored. It may not seem like it at first blush, but there is a significant cost that goes into holding elections. However, the outcome of an election is of even greater importance and can have much more significant, much longer standing, intangible costs connected to it. These suggestions also fall short of the alternate path taken by at least one nation I know of, wherein voting is legally required, as in you get a fine for not voting if you are eligible to do so.
Turns out that particular nation has one of the highest satisfaction rates with their political system of any democratic nation. Guess why? Because everyone participates. There are very few who do not have a personal stake in the outcomes at every level because they take part in that process. There are other components to it as well, including how elections are funded, but turnout is the most immediate way that we can influence and improve the system. Just some food for thought.
Comments
Post a Comment