Governance: Elston He reflects on voter apathy

Elston He reflects on voter apathy

An editorial posted January 30, 2008.

Next year’s presidential election will surely prove monumental, for it is the first in the new millennium to be without an incumbent. Whoever is sworn into the White House will be forced to begin new paths for the United States in a world that is feeling the forces of globalization, religious fundamentalism, and the emergence of possible superpower countries India and China. The outcome of the 2008 election will be extremely important; what will be even more important is the voter turnout. Voter turnout is a reliable, general benchmark for the health of all democracies, and the United State is no exception. In 2000, less than half of all eligible voters participated in the presidential election, and that rate was even lower for the congressional elections. This extent of voter apathy can only be detrimental to the democratic institutions of America. Government and community leaders and programs must strive harder to increase voter participation, for the voice of the people must be heard, must be expressed, must be represented in order for a democracy to truly be a democracy. 

Voter participation ensures that a nation can live up to its democratic ideals. A democracy, often defined as the free and equal right of every person to participate in government by electing representatives of the people by the majority of the people, generally seeks to embody the wishes, expectations, and thoughts of the public. If the mass populace does not participate in these elections, then only a partial representation of the public will becomes the full guiding force for all citizens in a nation. This can only ensure that many voters, or rather non-voters, will have their ideas suppressed rather than expressed. When this non-expression of ideas occurs, domestic unrest can be the only result.  

Take, for example, the current situation in the United States concerning involvement in the Iraq War, which began in the spring of 2003. According to one recent poll by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, nearly 70 percent of adults disapprove of the president’s handling of the war, and another ABC News and Washington Post poll shows that people believe the Democratic Party, the party that did not control the federal government when the war was started, would have done a better job than the Republicans in Iraq by 16 percentage points. Although this article does not seek to discuss the war itself, its causes or its effects, it would seem logical that had the elections of 2000 been a Democratic victory, then the public would have higher approval ratings for whatever actions the Democrats would have taken. Whether the Democrats would have been voted into office or not remains uncertain, but what remains true is that had there been higher voter participation, the results may have changed dramatically. Less than half of America’s people were heard in 2000, and the unheard voices could have made a big difference not only in Iraq, but also with every other issue on which the two parties are divided, thus changing the entire status of the United States, both domestically and internationally.  

Furthermore, the reelection of incumbents without any real competition poses a major threat to democracy. Ineffective policies are allowed to continue without any input, and new, more valuable ideas are withheld from the opportunity to make themselves successful. Such lack of competition then occurs in elections for the House of Representatives and state legislatures. In 2002, 98 percent of the incumbents seeking another term in the House were reelected, displaying how House elections are by far the least competitive races of any other freely elected national legislative body in the world. More recently, in 2006, the voter turnout for congressional races was a mere 37 percent. Another such example can be seen in the presidential primaries, several of which are scheduled on the same day – Super Tuesday – quite early before the actual election. Because so much emphasis is put on these early primaries, voters in states whose primaries come later in the year no longer have the opportunity to make meaningful decisions, for the general outcome has already been seemingly pre-determined. Also, as these later-scheduled states are less important to the result, the candidates put significantly less focus on campaigning in those states, resulting in lower voter knowledge and enthusiasm. Bush and Gore's Super Tuesday victories in 2000 effectively made later primaries useless, with turnout a third lower than in the early-contest states. Participation is extremely important to keep democratic ideals alive, but when competition is practically removed, participation drops accordingly. Sadly, the level to which voting activity has dropped is embarrassingly low. America needs to infuse greater civic responsibility in its citizens, for voting is not only a right and privilege that can be used, but is in fact a duty that must be performed. 

The large proportion of people choosing not to vote signifies a significant problem: a problem whose causes must be identified and rectified. After reaching record heights in 1964, voter participation has gradually decreased over the years. In 1964, nearly 100 percent of registered voters cast their ballots, while a majority of the total population had registered to vote. As noted above, however, today the voting rate is depressingly low. There are a variety of factors influencing voter participation, including the media and politics itself. Although these factors pose problems, they cannot be solved instantly, but will require a general about-face in how the public views politics as a whole. 

The dramatic rise of negative campaigning has had a corresponding negative impact on voters by reducing the appeal of elections. According to the Vanishing Voter Project, run by Harvard University's Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, half of all advertisements run by candidates are negative. Other changes in campaigns also play a role in reducing voter participation, such as the importance of personal incidents, an increase in the number of campaign promises made to special-interest groups, and the increasing length of campaigns. For over two-thirds of participating voters, campaigns have only served to make the elections more depressing, rather than making voters more confident about the choices they make. When voters adopt this kind of attitude, they become less likely to vote, and Americans become misrepresented by their leaders in government. Another problem relates to the media. The major broadcast networks no longer give full coverage to important debates and conventions. In 2004, ABC, CBS, and NBC only covered an average of three hours of conventions, a pitiful amount that explains why many voters seem uninformed about the issues and candidates for whom they are voting.  

Political parties are weaker today, and strong party loyalty has also disappeared. Previously, parties commanded large bases of support based on important issues, especially economic ones that easily split voters. However, today’s political parties’ platforms encompass a wide variety of issues, and thus the parties themselves are weaker. Political parties represent a certain ideology embodied by a single candidate; without such party affiliation, there is no longer a pull to vote on those issues. Similarly, without powerful party loyalty, many Americans have lost interest and commitment in politics, and by connection elections. Division of Americans along Republican, Democratic, and Independent lines shows an approximately equal distribution, with 31.3 percent, 35.9 percent, and 32.9 percent of the population, respectively. The voting pattern among partied citizens and unaffiliated citizens is very different; Americans with a party loyalty have a voting rate more than twice that of independents. The decline of clearly defined parties and strong party loyalties is an important factor in decreased voter participation. 

Many people think that their vote has no real impact on the final result of an election, and consequently they do not bother registering or appearing to vote. This feeling of exclusion from the decision making process is the most significant cause of low voter participation. Although that mindset may seem true at first, given the vast number of total votes cast (almost 125 million in 2004), the logic behind it is obviously flawed. If everyone decided that his or her vote would not influence the election, even fewer people would disproportionately influence the elections.  

The element preventing greater participation in today’s scenario is a lack of civic responsibility. Most citizens simply do not feel they have a duty to fully participate in government. However, voting should not only be seen as a right, but also a duty. As American citizens, people should feel the need to contribute to the well-being of their society. One important method of doing so is exercising the right to vote, for voting helps to keep democracy alive and flourishing. This lack of civic virtue harms our democratic government; it shows a lack of respect for the nation that provides its citizens with essential civil liberties and the ability for self-improvement regardless of race or religion. Again, many people do not feel an obligation to promote the needs of the community, and the absence of civic responsibility among American citizens is the most debilitating factor that contributes to voter apathy. 

Although there exists no panacea for low voter participation, there are a number of ways American society can change itself to help solve this problem. Most of the negative campaigning waged by candidates, and presidential ones especially, reach voters through the media, usually television. Instead of focusing solely on corporate profits, the major broadcast stations could provide more unbiased, clean commentary explaining the platforms and issues of each candidate, as well as spend more primetime airing debates and national party conventions, which are events from which voters can learn important information about how candidates stand on particular issues. Information is the crucial factor in determining how voters vote the way they do; increasing voter knowledge would lead to smarter decisions and a better understanding of what politicians can do for the electorate. Also, the length of campaigns needs to be dramatically shortened. The major candidates usually start their campaigns a full year and a half before the elections in November, in the hopes that they will have a longer time period to win voters over, but long campaigns actually lead to a decrease in voter attention by Election Day. Even information originally learned about the candidates may well be forgotten a few months later.  

The voting process itself is not conducive to high voter participation, and state governments can take many easy steps to change this situation. Voter registration is commonly cited as a reason for not voting, and thus registration should become an automatic process, as is the case with many European democracies. Same-day registration could be another way to solve this particular problem; in the six states with same-day registration (New Hampshire, Maine, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Wyoming, and Idaho), voter turnout is among the highest in the nation. Same-day registration also leads to an increase in the likelihood that citizens will know when, where, and how to register, thus leading to higher voter participation. Programs such as the Civic Engagement Initiative, which increased vote participation by 33.4 percent in the greater Boston area, should be implemented to help register new voters. Another boon to voter participation would occur if polling hours were extended; most people have to vote before or after work, contributing to long lines for already tired citizens. Delays and long lines discourage voting, and thus extended polling hours would help solve this problem. Primary structures are currently designed so that many of the later-day states do not have a real voice in the primaries. This frontloading on Super Tuesday and Super Duper Tuesday can be easily removed by requiring states to schedule only one primary a day, spaced out in equal intervals so more states’ citizens have the opportunity to cast a meaningful ballot.  

The main problem, again, is the deficiency of civic responsibility among American citizens. Thus, the primary solution would be to increase this sense of obligation to vote and to serve the country. How? Schools are the answer. Schools should act as bastions of democracy, instilling in students a strong appreciation for American government and community. This appreciation can only lead students to feeling that they should contribute to their society, most particularly by voting. Starting with primary education and extending through high school, students need to be taught why voting is essential to the survival of democracy. Classrooms should engender responsible citizens endowed with the basic skills necessary for them to make sensible decisions during elections. In the senior year of high school especially, when students are at or near voting age, special care should be taken to inform students about how the voting system works and where they can register. Students who have taken a civics course are twice as likely to be registered to vote as those who have not taken such a course. Influencing voters while they are young will build healthy voting habits that can help ensure increased voter participation in the elections for years to come. It is a responsibility of all citizens living in a democracy to participate in their own government by electing the proper officials to represent them in office, and educating students about this responsibility will build greater civic virtue and thus reduce voter apathy. 

There is a multitude of reasons why Americans do not come out and vote on Election Day: non-registration, long lines, a feeling that their votes do not count, or general apathy towards politics as a whole. Luckily, there also exists a plethora of solutions that could be easily implanted, including changing the election schedule, extending polling hours, and expanding civic education. The United States of America provides one of the best examples of a functioning and prosperous democracy in the world, and to continue to do so requires increased voter participation and civic responsibility among each and every citizen in the country.  

 
Works Cited 
Carter, Jimmy and James A Baker III. "Building Confidence in U.S. Elections." September 2005. Commission on Federal Election Reform. 23 November 2007 . 

Gratschew, Maria. "Country View - United States." 17 May 2006. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. 21 November 2007 . 

"Iraq." 5 November 2007. PollingReport.com. 22 November 2007 . 

Kurtz, Karl T., Alan Rosenthal and Cliff Zukin. "Citizenship: A Challenge for All Generations." September 2003. National Conference of State Legislatures. 23 November 2007 . 

McDonald, Michael. "2004 Voting-Age and Voting-Eligible Population Estimates and Voter Turnout." 5 June 2006. United States Elections Project. 22 November 2007 . 
—. "2006 Voting-Age and Voting-Eligible Population Estimates." 3 July 2007. United States Elections Project. 22 November 2007 . 

Northeast Action. "Report on the Civic Engagement Initiative." November 2003. Northeast Action. 21 November 2007 . 

"Number of Democrats Falls to New Low, Republicans Decline Too." 1 August 2007. Rasmussen Reports. 22 November 2007  
. 

Patterson, Thomas E. "Can Anything Be Done to Increase Voter Participation." 17 December 2002. History News Network. 18 November 2007 . 

—. "Where Have All the Voters Gone?" 18 November 2002. History News Network. 21 November 2007 . 

—. "Why Do So Many Americans Hate Politics?" 25 November 2002. History News Network. 2007 18 November . 

—. "Why Is News So Negative These Days?" 2 December 2002. History News Network. 18 November 2007 . 

—. "Why the Re-election of Incumbents Year After Year Is a Threat to Democracy." 9 December 2002. History News Network. 18 November 2007 . 

—. "Young Voters and the 2004 Election." 2 February 2005. The Vanishing Voter Project. 18 November 2007 .