Some Thoughts About Voting

I have been wondering lately how we got into this sorry state here in US. It's easy to blame Bush and his minions, but, as the more obnoxious conservatives point out, he won the election: get over it. How did he get elected, especially the second time?

In November, the economy was in the tank, unemployment and underemployment figures were high, we were in the midst of a bloody war that was supposed to be a cake walk: Kerry should have beaten the pants off Bush, but he didn't. Bush got his second term, and it wasn't as close as it was in 2000.

I've considered the "stolen election" theory that blames Diebold. I've even considered the "poor campaign rife with mistakes" theory that blames Kerry and his handlers, but there has to be something else added to the mix. I suspect that a lot of people just didn't vote.

One survey indicates that only 60% eligible voters actually voted in the 2000 election, and I'm sure not many more voted in 2004, if in fact more voted. To be fair, I should note that the term "eligible" means people of voting age who are not incapacitated by being in prison or felons. I suspect the rate of "registered" voters who voted is higher. Still, only 60% of people who could vote did. That's depressing.

Apparently this country is not alone in its declining voter participation. Samizdata, a very Libertarian British blog I frequent just because I enjoy some of their outrageous rants, commented on the same phenomenon in England. After noting the low voter turnout, David Carr notes the following response from some of the British pols:

Not surprisingly, this has resulted in a hubbub of worry among the political classes with attendant brow-furrowing and hand-wringing over what should be done about it. Some of the more foolishly optimistic (or perhaps just ill-advised) politicos have launched themselves into toe-curlingly embarrassing campaigns to 'get down with the kidz' only to hurtle smack, dab into a wall of indifference. The less exhibitionist among them have been uttering dark murmurings about 'compulsory voting'. ...

More interesting to me (for the moment at least) is Mr. Hoon's choice of words:

Mr Hoon [former Defence Minister Geoff Hoon] said: "My fear is that as the older, more regular voters die, we will be left with a significant number of people for whom voting is neither a habit, nor a duty..."Is that how Mr. Hoon thinks of voting? As a 'habit'? As a 'duty'? Where is the call to democratic arms? Where is the sizzle of enfranchised excitement? Where are the glamourous invocations of citizen empowerment? All long gone is the inescapable truth. Instead we are left with habit and duty. [Emphasis added]

So, the Brits are considering compulsary voting? Should we? Obviously we should not. Forcing people to vote would be a repugnant addition to true democracy. But then, what?

I think Mr. Carr has suggested the part of the answer I've been searching for: "the sizzle of enfranchised excitement...citizen empowerment."

Yes, we need to clean up our elections and make sure that every vote cast is verified and counted (as Senators Boxer and Clinton are attempting to do). We also need to engage the public more; we need to start training candidates who can energize their supporters, not make them cringe; and we need to get on the ground in every precinct and run candidates for each slot, and then go door to door and urge people to vote as if their lives depended on it, because they do.

In other words, we need to let Howard Dean do his job.

Hit 'em with a chair, Howard!