By Marc Jampole
Who are the 63.7% of the population who didn’t vote in
mid-term elections this year? That’s the highest percentage of people to sit on
their hands on election day since 1942, when poll taxes and voting restrictions
prevented a significant part of our population—all Afro-American—from voting
throughout the South and in other parts of the country.
I want to sort out the nonvoters, not demographically, but
by the reasons they didn’t vote. The Internet is full of chatter about why
people stayed home, in most cases giving undue weight to the one element that
proved whatever point they were trying to make. I haven’t seen a survey, but I’m
sure that significant numbers of citizens didn’t vote for the reason I’m about
to discuss.
Let’s start with the slew of state laws that make it harder
to vote because they shorten the voting period, make it harder to register,
require more documents to register or require identification to vote. Certainly
some part of the difference in the percentage of voters from this election and
the mid-term four years ago stems from the fact that it was harder to register
and to cast a ballot in many states. But in 2010, an enormous 58.2% of all
eligible voters exercised their right to stay home from the polls. If we take a
broad axe to this data, we come up with an explanation of why about 5.5% of the
eligible voters stayed home: because new voting laws restrained or kept them
from voting, a handsome price to pay indeed to try (emphasis on “try”)
to prevent a repeat of the less than ten cases of voter fraud that have
occurred across the nation over the past 30 years.
But what about the other 58.2% of the eligible who didn’t vote?
Why did they stay home? Here are the standard impediments to voting:
·
Was ill:
Some number of voters always miss voting because they happen to be ill that day
or have long-term illnesses that affect their ability to make voting decisions.
·
Couldn’t
get off work: It’s criminal that all employers of all sizes aren’t required
to give citizens three hours to vote on election day. Keep in mind, though,
that a goodly number of those who couldn’t get time to vote lost options for
early voting because of new laws limiting it.
·
Disillusioned
by the system: These people figure that it’s a fixed game and they just
don’t want to play. It’s very difficult to argue with the disillusioned,
especially given the record of the last 35 years in which our elected officials
have repeatedly enacted laws and policies that harm 99% of the population but
help the super-wealthy and large corporations. On the other hand, this year’s
referenda favoring higher minimum wages passed in every municipality given the
chance to vote on the issue. To a great extent, then, the disillusioned are
perpetuating their own chagrin by not voting.
·
Never
votes in nonpresidential years: It’s an enormous group. Over the past two
presidential elections, an average of 40.1% of eligible voters stayed home;
during the last two off-years, 60.95% of voters stayed home. Using a blunt axe
again, that computes to a little over one fifth (20%) of all eligible voters
who only vote in presidential years.
·
Have never
voted: Say what you will about poverty, a lack of education, language
barriers and upbringing, the mass media barrages us with so much information
about elections, that it’s very hard not to blame those who have never
voted—they are hurting themselves, and they are hurting others. Of course, a
conservative of the Platonic or Burkean ilk would say that it hurts the body
politic when uneducated or unprepared people vote (which for most of recorded
history has meant those without property). I can’t agree with their logic. But
when I’m wishing for laws that make it easier to vote and media that cover the
real issues, I also wish for an electorate that believed more in civic virtues
such as voting (plus serving on jury duty and whistle-blowing).
Those who are disillusioned, only vote for President or have
never voted don’t realize how much power they could potentially wield. Here’s
why: Most votes are extremely close, and that was certainly the case in 2014. In
fact, virtually all newspaper reports, opinion pieces and think-tank
whitepapers since the beginning of the republic have labeled as a “landslide”
every election in which one candidate receives 53% of the vote. Of course, the
news media and their owners have a vested interest in maintaining overall
political stability, which is why the bar is set so low for landslides. For
most of the ruling elite, having a stable election that produces a consensus is
more important than who actually wins; especially nowadays when candidates of
both parties feed so luxuriously at the troughs of big and often shadowy
donors.
Think of it, though. More eligible voters stayed home this
year than the number of voters it would take to declare a landslide in favor of
a candidate.
It’s a shameful record.
Yes, blame the Kochs and other right-wingers for bankrolling
those who tell the lies they want the country to believe. Blame the news media
for trivializing the election. Blame state legislatures for restrictive voting
laws. Blame Obama for suddenly being so unlikeable (a new euphemism for Black).
But let's not forget to blame non-voters.
No comments:
Post a Comment