[fblike]
Although Americans enjoy a privilege that billions of people in the world do not currently enjoy, a sizable number of them decide not to exercise it each year. This privilege is voting. Since 1828 Americans have had the opportunity to directly influence the outcome of the presidential election and popular participation in elections had been a hallmark of American history since the colonial period (although the economic, racial, and gender groups that could partake in voting has been expanded since that time). In 2012, 55% of Americans cast ballots, but this is well short of 1960s numbers where more than 60% of eligible Americans cast ballots. When it comes to midterm and off-year elections, even fewer Americans participate. For example, in 2014 only 36.4% of voters participated, which was the lowest turnout for a midterm election in seventy years. Finding a lasting solution to voter apathy, which appears to be on the rise as a Hillary Clinton-Donald Trump presidential campaign is taking shape, will likely be easier said than done, but there are some creative ideas for fixing American attitudes about the political process.
This topic brief will provide some necessary vocabulary for discussing voter apathy, some reasons that voters are apathetic in American politics, and then some proposed solutions for fixing this problem.
Readers are also encouraged to use the links below and in the related R&D to bolster their files about this topic.
Vocabulary
Compulsory Voting: An electoral system where voters are legally required to cast a ballot. Those who do not do so may have to pay a fine or do community service. Notable countries that have some form of compulsory voting include Argentina, Australia, and Brazil.
Early Voting: The process where voters can cast their ballots before the scheduled time for balloting on Election Day. More than half of American states have adopted early voting since the 1990s, with many not requiring voters to provide any excuse as to why they have to cast their ballots early.
Voter Apathy: Defined as a “perceived lack of caring” by voters during a specific election. There are many reasons that voters may not care about an elections such as an unhappiness with the candidates, a feeling of alienation from the political process, a general disinterest with politics, or thinking that one’s vote will not matter.
Voter Turnout: The percentage of eligible voters that actually cast ballots during an election. Since the 1960s the United States has typically averaged less than 60% turnout for its presidential races. Turnout for midterm elections has typically been between 36-45%, with off-year elections averaging 20-30%.
Reasons for Voter Apathy
Lack of Compelling, Exciting Candidates: Elections that have typically been considered “high stakes” or historic tend to lead to greater public participation in the political process. The same is true when a candidate energizes voters to go to the polls and pull the lever for them. For example, the 1960 presidential election between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy drew 62.8% o Americans to the polls, whereas in 1992 many independents were galvanized to go to the polls by oil tycoon Ross Perot, who pulled in 18% of the popular vote against President George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. President Barack Obama’s campaign in 2008 also led to 57% of Americans casting ballots, with higher turnout in the African-American community due to the opportunity to cast votes for America’s first black president. Political scientists argue that diminished participation is tied to the lack of candidates that effectively energize voters and give them something to vote for rather than something to vote against.
The Perception That Politics is Corrupt: American became more skeptical toward government after the Watergate scandal of the 1970s. Whereas voter anger was once directed toward executive abuses back then, it is now directed at “establishment” political figures that voters feel care more about lobbyists and big donors than the people that vote for them. In the recent presidential election this has been manifested in Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump challenging the Democratic and Republican “establishments,” respectively. Of course, the term “establishment” can be nebulous and some politicians, notably former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, have challenged that idea that an “establishment” even exists. However, the term can refer to America’s existing class of politicians and party leaders. Voters wonder why some politicians are leaving office wealthier than when they entered and why some end up with “cozy” jobs for lobbying firms when they lose elections. Democratic voters that support Bernie Sanders have also grown frustrated over the use of superdelegates, which they say exist to thwart the popular will (nevermind the fact that Hillary Clinton has actually won more popular votes).
Voters Feel Helpless About Making Lasting Change: In a country with more than 300 million people, it is easy for voters to think that their voice will not make much of a difference when it comes to national politics. The Christian Science Monitor explains that only 12% of Republicans think that their party is responsive to voters, while only 25% of Democrats feel that way about their party. The use of the Electoral College to select a president has the tendency to disenfranchise voters in states that are already decided. For example, Kentucky will likely go for Donald Trump this November, while California is likely to go for the Democratic candidate. As a result, voters in these states have little reason to turnout because their electoral votes have already been parceled out. Voters in states that consistently matter such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida tend to be more energized, but voters there are barraged with advertising so much that it turns some off from the political process. Furthermore, Republican voters that are backing Donald Trump argue that the hostility that some party leaders have towards his candidacy shows that those in charge are not open to new ideas or candidates entering the party. And lastly, some voters feel disenchanted by the fact that incumbents are re-elected an average of 98% of the time. This may be puzzling when there is so much anger directed at established parties and figures, but extempers should understand that when people vote they rarely deem their representative as part of the problem. Instead, the problem is “other representatives” or senators, resulting in a system where the same faces continue making decisions long after presidential administrations change.
Solutions for Voter Apathy
Allowing for Early Voting: When Election Day is held on a specific day, not all voters may be able to make the polls due to personal or work commitments. As a result, some have proposed allowing voters to cast their ballots early. States typically allow for early voting via absentee ballots if a voter can demonstrate that they will not be able to be in a local precinct on Election Day, but critics of absentee voting say that some of the requirements can prove cumbersome. Currently, thirty-three U.S. states and the District of Columbia allow for early voting without requiring that voters provide some excuse. In addition, three U.S. states – Oregon, Washington, and Colorado – have voters cast their ballots through the mail instead of having people show up to vote in person. The percentage of early voters had risen since 1992. Whereas less than 10% of voters participated in early voting in that year’s presidential race, nearly one-third of voters did so in 2008. Proponents of early voting say that it allows people to vote on a time schedule that is convenient for them, with polls typically opening weeks before an election. However, critics charge that it hurts the democratic process. For example, what happens if a significant scandal breaks and shows that a candidate is ill-suited for office and a large number of voters have already cast ballots?
Hold a Special Lottery for Those Who Do Vote: This idea sounds pretty crazy, but the idea is that everyone who voted would be entered into a special lottery where a cash prize would be awarded. A few California cities considered this idea in recent years after abysmal turnouts for midterm and off-year elections. Appealing to people’s civic responsibility works in theory, but has been shown quite ineffective in practice. Economists would probably agree that people respond well to financial incentives. The U.S. economy is based on such a model, so why not take this free market system one step further and tell voters that if they cast their ballot that they could become a millionaire the next day? It is highly unlikely this idea will ever be adopted, but it is fun to bring up in a speech. Critics of the idea claim that it would run afoul of federal and state regulations that prohibit favors being awarded for voting (and the idea could get out of hand if political parties started their own lotteries for people that voted for their candidates).
Make Election Day a National Holiday: Although the federal government has little power over state elections beyond upholding constitutional requirements that voters are not made to pay a poll tax and are not denied the franchise on the basis of sex or race, the federal government could pass legislation that would make Election Day a national holiday. Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is a champion of this idea, arguing that America needs a “Democracy Day” where civic participation would be encouraged. Although employers are supposed to allow time for their workers to vote, this is not a good solution for workers that do not work in the same precinct they vote in. For example, what is someone supposed to do if they work in another city or several hours away? Supporters of a national holiday say that giving everyone a day off of work would make it easier for them to vote, but critics say that America has too many holidays and there is little proof that making Election Day a holiday will improve voting totals.
Require Voter Registration: The United States, unlike other parts of the democratic world, does not mandate that voters register to vote or require that the government register citizens to do so. In other words, state governments could simply pass a law that required voters to “opt out” of being registered rather than “opted in.” This would make it easier for voters to cast ballots because many people are ignorant of the advance notice that is typically required to register for an election. Minnesota is unique among states in that it has same day registration, but other states such as Kentucky are not as generous, requiring voters to fill out paperwork months before an election will be held. If voters were automatically registered this obstacle to the process would be eliminated according to proponents of this idea.
Turn Primaries Into “Open” Primaries: One of the restrictions of voter turnout in primary elections is that eleven states have “closed” primaries, where only voters that have registered with a specific party can choose that party’s nominees for a particular office, and many other states have “semi-closed” primaries where voters can align with a party on Election Day so long as they were registered ahead of time. Only eleven states currently have “open” primaries where people can cross over and vote in another party’s primaries on Election Day. This has the effect of letting voters participate if they are independents. Proponents say that open primaries would add much needed energy to the political process, while enfranchising a growing number of Americans that are unwilling to choose a party. In fact, data from Gallup last year shows that 43% of Americans consider themselves to be independent. This change would have done at the state level, as elections are handled by the states and not the federal government, but such a change might be welcome, especially for local elections where one party may have a grip on power and its candidates may run unopposed in a general election. In situations such as this independents do not have a voice. However, critics say that opening primaries to independents or voters of the other party violate the founding principles of why political parties exist. After all, if Republicans help choose the Democratic candidate or non-Democrats get to have a voice in the process then why have party primaries at all?
Use Animated Videos and Designs to Educate the Public About the Democratic Process: In an era that is very media driven, proponents of this solution argue that voters need to be reminded about how important it is to vote. The Sacramento Bee discusses how Culver City in Southern California created a voting mascot called Birdee, who was then featured in English and Spanish language videos discussing how to register to vote and when Election Day took place. Although skeptics chaffed at the idea of using a mascot to encourage civic participation, results of this year’s April elections seemed to bear fruit as voters turned out in record numbers without having a competitive race on the ballot. Birdee was featured on sample ballots, street banners, and on posters in public spaces, serving as a template for other areas to try the same technique.
Sources
“A Feasible Roadmap to Compulsory Voting” (The Atlantic, November 2, 2015)
“Don’t Blame Trump: American Democracy Was Broken Before He Muscled In” (Newsweek, May 3, 2016)
“How a Mascot Increased Voter Turnout in California” (The Sacramento Bee, May 15, 2016)
“Is There Too Much Democracy in America or Too Little?” (The New York Times, May 14, 2016)
“Make Me” (The Economist, May 28, 2016)
“New U.S. Voting Laws Could Suppress Turnout, Some Say” (Voice of America, May 25, 2016)
“Obama Endorses Idea of National Voting Holiday” (Slate, May 12, 2016)
“Why Doesn’t Every State Have Automatic Voter Registration?” (Mother Jones, May 12, 2016)
“Why Don’t More Americans Vote in Presidential Elections?” (The Washington Post, May 12, 2016)
“Why S.F. Should Lower Voting Age” (The San Francisco Chronicle, May 9, 2016)
“Young: Is GOP Medically Allergic to Voter Participation?” (The Coloradoan, May 26, 2016)