More on Not Voting

As the last day of registration draws near (Monday, Oct. 22), we revisit our question of the day: why vote? Here's one pithy response from the interwebs: 

And from a fellow blogger (http://greendragonblog.com/what-do-you-say-to-friends-who-wont-vote-or-vote-third-party/) a very thorough analysis: 

One result of the widespread cynicism about public institutions that grew out of the Sixties era—combined with the thirty-year Republican war on government’s capacity to do its job—is a large number of people who state proudly that they do not vote, or who choose to vote for minor-party candidates who have no possibility of reaching office.

Typically, their arguments include one or more of these elements:

Conspiracy theory. “Shadowy Powers really call all the shots in our world, and the elections are just a show.”

Cherry-picking complaint. “My issue is X and the major parties are lousy on that, so if I vote at all, I’m voting for Righteous McFringerton of the Thoroughly Groovy Party.”

Overgeneralized false equivalence. “Both major parties are the same. They’re controlled by the same people, so it doesn’t matter who you vote for.” On the left, the supposed puppeteers are “the rich” and “corporations”; on the right you get “special interests,” which is code for racial and sexual minorities, public interest nonprofits, and unions.

Strategic fantasy. “I vote third party because we have to start somewhere, and the two mainstream parties are lost causes. One day, the Good Stuff Party will be a major force in this country.”

I’ve been asked by several people how I would make a case to such folk that there is good reason for them to vote, and to vote for a candidate with an actual chance of winning. This post is in response to these requests.
To begin with we have to recognize that people who make these arguments do so because at root, they feel powerless. They prefer to believe that they are “in the know”, unlike the “sheeple” that make up most of the public, because it allows them to feel good about themselves in the context of that powerlessness. They have chosen this stance as a preferable alternative to grappling with complex issues and an electoral system in which most of us can only play a tiny role.
So please read the following responses with the caveat that rational argument cannot trump an emotional impulse. Many who express these beliefs simply aren’t persuadable: they need their shelter too much to give it up.
On “they’re all run by the same Powerful Interests”: I don’t think anyone disagrees that there are powerful interests which swing disproportionate weight in this country. But 100 years ago, it was far worse: mining and railroads and heavy industry were completely in charge. They openly bought and sold votes…and politicians.
But somehow, voters managed to do a lot of things those interests didn’t want to see happen. They elected reformers who started regulating those industries. They passed child labor and workplace safety laws, and the 40-hour work week, and guaranteed insurance for our bank deposits, and legal equality for minorities, and air and water quality protections, and invented the national park. Those voters and the people they elected are the reason you don’t have lead pipes delivering your drinking water or arsenic dusted on your food to deter spoilage. They’re the reason we have Social Security and Medicare, which are probably keeping some of your relatives afloat right now.
Powerful interests fought against all of those things, but they lost. Just a couple of years ago, those big interests lost on issues like the health care bill and the Wall Street reform bill, even though they spent millions on lobbyists trying to stop them.
Did we get all of what we wanted? No. But what we got made things a lot better than they were previously, and those interests hated every bit of it. That is what can happen if we put people in office who feel more loyal to us than they do to those interests. And the only way to do that is to vote for them.
A lot of men and women were terrorized, jailed and murdered to get the power you’re saying there’s no point in using. They knew voting mattered. Getting the vote meant the difference between oppression and freedom, between hope and despair, and in many cases between life and death for those people and their kids. The interests who tried to keep them from getting it knew it, too, because sure enough, when those who had been shut out of the election booth finally got the power to vote, things changed.
Think about it: whatever your opinion of him, Barack Obama could never have been President if African Americans had never been allowed to vote or run for office. That proves that voting matters, even when powerful interests are on the other side.
Sure, Exxon and the Koch Brothers have a lot of influence in our politics…but so do millions of ordinary people, if they gather together around what they care about, and back candidates who mostly agree with them and have a chance of winning.
I’m not saying the system can’t be improved. But it could also be a lot worse. To me, the excessive power of the wealthy and powerful business interests is even more reason to work to elect people who will push back against them.
On the major parties (or the President) being wrong on My Pet Issue (usually, pot legalization):  You know, you can’t expect the political system to be like a genie granting you wishes. You have to fight for what you want, and sometimes it can take a long time before you get it. In the meantime, the idea that just because your issue isn’t making much progress right now means that voting isn’t worth bothering with at all doesn’t make much sense, does it?
That’s like saying you’re willing to starve to death because your favorite food isn’t on the menu.
Look at it this way: there are more than 300 million people in this country. In anything even somewhat resembling a real democracy, government has to listen both to you and to people who completely disagree with you. So outcomes are going to be somewhere in the middle. Nobody gets everything they want.
But the only people who get to make those decisions are the ones who are in office. If you help elect someone in the name of an issue you care about, that official has to pay attention to it. Being a part of a winning campaign puts you in a position to make progress on the things you care about.
Incidentally, what about everyone else? If politics are making progress on your top issue progress difficult, don’t you have friends or family who care just as much about other issues? Like a woman’s right to choose, or the environment, or civil equality, or the cost of a college education, or taxes, or war? Why wouldn’t you help elect someone who can help make the difference for them?
On “both major parties are the same.” You know, back in the 1990s this was somewhat true. But now it is completely untrue. The Republican Party has become a raving gang of right-wing extremists. On any major issue you can name, there are huge differences between them and Democrats.
If they’d had a Republican President, Congress would never have ended Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Republicans are trying to reinstate it right now, and permanently ban gay marriage anywhere in the country with a Constitutional amendment. Republican leaders complain that we ended the war in Iraq. They want to go back to a system that allows health insurance companies to drop your coverage if you use it. Their solution to all problems is to give more money to the rich, even though that’s been proven a disaster for most Americans. Many of them want to eliminate public education, take away any meaningful help for people in their old age, make homosexuality a crime, force women to have babies against their will, even if conceived by rape, and sell off most of our national parks and public lands. They deny that climate change exists. The list goes on, and it is ugly.
There is a difference. There is a tremendous difference, and pretending there isn’t doesn’t make you look smart or knowledgeable.
If nothing else, think about the Supreme Court. Republicans have appointed a narrow, 1-vote majority of hard-right Court Justices which handed the White House to George W. Bush even though Al Gore won the election, which have taken away much of our right to privacy, and which approved unlimited corporate expenditure in political campaigns. They’re getting ready to make important decisions on issues like abortion rights and even access to birth control. The next President will appoint at least one Justice to the Court, and maybe as many as three. That will lock in the direction of the Court—and our rights—for decades. Several of the current Court majority believe that government has every right to police what you’re allowed to do in your bedroom. If for no other reason, don’t you think that’s a good reason to vote for the guy on the other team, who doesn’t agree with that stuff?
On the fantasy of “building a national third party”. At the local level, sometimes third parties can bring new ideas and shake things up. That’s not a bad thing. But at the national level, history says they’re a counterproductive strategy, and a formula for failure.
The United States settled into a two-party system shortly after the Civil War, and the only effect third parties have had since was to split the vote and hand elections to the people the third-party advocates disagreed with most.  Ross Perot and his Reform Party split the Republican Party twice, and gave the White House to Bill Clinton. John Anderson undermined Jimmie Carter, and we got Reagan. The Green Party’s Ralph Nader drew away enough voters from Al Gore in Florida to give the election to George W. Bush, thus providing us the unnecessary Iraq War, a draconian Patriot Act, a smoking crater of an economy, and a shameful reputation on the international stage, all of which wouldn’t have happened if Nader hadn’t been running. Heck, you can go back to Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose Party in 1912, which split the Republicans and handed the White House to Woodrow Wilson.
It doesn’t work. It’s been tried repeatedly. It’s a failing strategy.
Oh, and if you think you’re “making a statement”? You are, but it’s not the one you think. By and large, elected officials write off those who vote for third parties as fringe extremists and cranks who may safely be ignored. Voting for a third party makes you and your issues less influential, not more.
Please: think like an adult. You don’t get to have the ideal government in your mind. It isn’t the political process’ job to hand you your wish list on a platter. This is a complicated world full of shades of grey. It isn’t about “the lesser of two evils,” it’s about choosing the best of the available options.
Third party candidates aren’t real options. They’re castles in the air. The only possible effect of chasing them is to undermine the issues you claim to care about. In other words, to make things worse.
Finally, I find that this tends to make advocates of the conspiracy theory sit up and take notice:
You’re being used. The Republican Party has been encouraging cynicism about government and the political system for more than 40 years, because most of us disagree with their policies, and they can’t win if we turn out and vote for Democrats. And you’re playing right into their plan.
Why do you think they’re pouring so much effort into trying to suppress the vote in areas that vote Democratic? Why would they bother if the outcome isn’t important? C’mon: business guys don’t pour millions of dollars into something that doesn’t really matter.
So wise up: vote, and do it for candidates who 1) have a shot at winning; and 2) you agree with: not on everything, but on most things.
How hard is it, after all? What on Earth can it hurt?

Who me, Vote?

WHY VOTE – IT JUST ENCOURAGES THEM

Why vote?

You’ve heard that, right?  Why vote, it just encourages them.  That’s the jaded citizen talking. The one who pays her taxes, keeps her lawn neat and her kids clean, and not one person she ever voted for got elected.  Except for the ones who did and then disappointed her, because they didn’t do all the great things they had promised.

“Why vote?” she asks. “My vote doesn’t count, not really, even if I vote for the winning side, they’re all corrupt anyway.”

It’s easy to feel this way. I used to feel this way.  When it came time for me to register to vote at the age of 21 (yes, that was the voting age back “in the day,”) I said why bother? It’s just a choice between Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee.   I wasn’t thinking about things like Supreme Court appointments. I wasn’t thinking beyond the big national stage on which politics was played out like a high drama production on the nightly news.  We had bigger fish to fry, a war to end (Vietnam), women’s rights to secure, still more schools to integrate.

I didn’t connect the election with getting those things done, because I didn’t see that the national Strutters and Fretters on the (still small) screen were going to get a single thing done for any of those issues.

Direct action was where it was at. Marching and sitting in and  (for many of the young people around me) breaking things. Not so very different from today’s Occupy movement and the break away groups who take their rage and frustration into the streets, not the ballot box.

So none of my peers voted for Humphrey. At best, we thought he was the lesser of two evils. At worst, no difference.  Imagine, if we had voted, we may never have had Nixon and Watergate.  Would the war have ended sooner? Who knows; we never will.

Room for both:

Well, now I know there is room for both expressions of discontent.  March, sit it, write angry letters and rant, (I’m not advocating breaking things; that just encourages them to arrest you, not productive in the long run). 

But vote too. It’s fast and painless. (Yes, a little homework required.) You can do it in the comfort of your own home.  It just takes a little time and effort to understand the issues.  And I bet you understand more about them than you think you do, so why not just check a box expressing your opinion?

The go out and rabble rouse all you want.

What your single vote gets you: 

Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor under Clinton, now a sage political commentator said this:  “Remember: The biggest party in America is neither Democrats nor Republicans. It’s the party of non-voters — a group that outnumbers the other two.”

So, see already, your non-vote has counted. The problem is it may have counted in a way you didn’t mean. It may have counted toward those not voting for something you wanted but didn’t vote for, because you thought your vote wouldn’t count.  

Voting lets you register a number, a statistic, on national issues, and even more importantly, on local issues.  Your vote may go into a big Halloween cauldron in the nationwide tally, but in your City, your County and even your State, your single vote can make a significant difference.  Here are some examples showing how your vote might just count a lot more than you think.

One vote in one small town’s very big election:

Here’s how it happened in one small town looking to raise money to keep a volunteer fire department going.

The fire tax needed a 2/3 majority to pass.  It looked like it would be fairly easy to attain as people in this remote coastal village relied on their volunteers as first responders in times of emergencies.  All voters were dutifully called by firefighters and their supporters before the election and many of them got a knock on their door.  Previous such measures had passed easily, but the volunteers were taking no chances as their need for up to date equipment was great.

On election night, the victory party turned into a wake when the final results were tallied and the measure came up one vote short.

The next day one of the volunteers casually asked another one if she voted before or after her shift. Very sheepishly, the volunteer answered, “I didn’t vote. I didn’t think my one vote would make a difference.”

You can bet that she hasn’t missed a vote since then.

                                                                     What could happen if an important tax measure fails. In this case, it wasn't 
                                                                     so dire; it passed at the next election and disaster was averted.

 

Slightly more votes in a bigger election:

 

In another election, this one for a crucial seat on the County Board of Supervisors, four candidates were in a hotly contested primary election.  One was a very popular sitting council member, and everyone agreed he would get the most votes. The race then was for the number two slot, to have a chance to go head to head over issues such as open space preservation and traffic in the fall.  

Two women were virtually neck and neck on election night, but there were still outstanding absentee ballots turned in too late to have been counted yet at the Registrar’s office.  Both women were fairly unknown and neither had served in elective office before. But one was a nurse and professor, with a strong environmental bent; while the other seemed more interested in smaller parochial issues.

Two weeks passed before the final votes were counted. The nurse had won the right to compete in the fall by 22 votes.  

The rest, as they say, is history. She fought a grueling general campaign, backed by the Sierra Club which culminated in victory in November and preservation of some of the County’s most important baylands. She has held her seat against tough challengers because of the coalition she was able to build in that first election. 

One last example: medium sized town, medium sized election, one anxious candidate:  

Another not so dramatic election was a school board election in a mid-sized city.  A challenger wanted to shake things up and ran against a popular incumbent. Without doing much at all, the incumbent led by 100 votes or so on election night.  The challenger was dejected." If only I’d walked one more precinct!" he lamented.  But wait, by the time the final late absentee votes were counted, he was victorious, now holding the 100 vote lead. He has not been challenged in his office since that time and has been an effective school board member.

So your vote counts. It might be your vote alone that does make the difference, or yours and a few friends you take to the polls or yours and hundreds who think like you, but have not taken the time to vote.

If nothing else, vote because so many people don’t want you to. They know that if people don’t vote, they win by default.  Why else are there so many voter suppression efforts underway, putting into place voter ID laws, machines that switch the votes, not enough ballot boxes, hanging chads.

If a few more people voted in Florida in 2000, maybe, just maybe there would have been enough of a critical mass to stop Bush before all the last chad was hung.