My political science paper on voter apathy, our fucked up political system, and why we will never be on top without massive reforms, and much more! Ignore the shit in parentheses.
A Democracy Without Choices Is Not A Democracy At All
America is a representative democracy, meaning citizens participate in government by electing public officials to represent their interests and make decisions on their behalf (JBG, p.34). Some contend that voter apathy, or lack of interest and concern weakens our democracy (American Heritage Dictionary, Houghton Mifflin), but this is simply not the case.
It is very easy to say nonvoters are apathetic, but in fact polls show quite the opposite. Although only 50% of the nation’s eligible voters voted in the 2000 presidential election, 83% of people polled had an interest in a political campaign (JBG, p.218).
I think that many voters do not vote because of a lack of candidates who embody their concerns (Halstead & Lind, Washington Post, 3/25-31/2002). Low voter turnout is likely caused by political cultural conditions of dissatisfaction and dissociation with today’s politicians (National Catholic Reporter, 6/14/1996; Lipset, Why Americans, 2/7/94; Dybowska, Voter Apathy, 10/96; Herbert, NYT, 10/4/96). For example, only 32.3% of eligible voters age 18 – 24 voted in the 2000 presidential election (Haar & Chedekel, Hartford Courant, 10/29/2000; Morin, Washington Post, 1/14-20/2002), not because they are apathetic (Morin, Washington Post, 1/14-20/2002); rather, no candidate expresses the concerns of young Americans (MSS p.257-262). Politicians today are unoriginal, uninspiring, homogeneous, without defining ideologies and out of touch with the masses (Will, In Defense, 10/10/83; National Catholic Reporter, 6/14/1996; Lipset, Why Americans, 2/7/94; Dybowska, Voter Apathy, 10/96; Herbert, NYT, 10/4/96). Just consider the candidates of the 2000 presidential election: illiterate Mr. Bush, and stiff-as- the-redwoods-he-hugs Mr. Gore. Why anyone would waste an hour of their life casting a vote in support of an candidate, who likely has little to say or do, and for whom they have marginal or indifferent feelings, just to feel emotional reward is beyond me (Will, In Defense, 10/10/83; Lipset, Why Americans, 2/7/94).
Furthermore, elections have become irrelevant moneyed popularity contests, epitomized by rhetoric and double talk and false promises (Morrison, LA Times, 11/4/98; Guinier, The Nation, 12/4/2000; Haar & Chedekel, Hartford Courant, 10/29/2000; Dybowska, Voter Apathy, 10/96; Catholic Reporter, 6/14/1996), with the winner being the richest candidate, not necessarily the best one (MSS, p.242-245). Candidates are essentially spoon fed rhetoric to regurgitate for the masses; they possess nary a single original inspiring thought in their dull heads.
Nonvoters do not weaken the idea of representative democracy. They are simply asserting their democratic freedom not to vote (JBG, p.223; Will, In Defense, 10/10/83).
Those who do not vote assert their right not to be represented; those who do vote are represented in our representative democracy. As long as somebody is elected, government will still be representative of those who voted (Morrison, LA Times, 11/4/98). Also, nonvoting can be considered a form of passive consent, with people expressing their contentment or indifference with the election of either homogeneous candidates (Will, In Defense, 10/10/83; Harwood, Washington Post, 11/5-11/90; The Economist, 8/22/1988).
It is my contention is that political system intentionally keeps itself unrepresentative of the nation’s population. The choices, and winners, in national elections, are limited to candidates from the majority Democratic and Republican Parties (Halstead & Lind, Washington Post, 3/25-31/2002), demonstrate no defining ideology (Will, In Defense, 10/10/83; Lipset, Why Americans, 2/7/94). Voters ignore independent candidates, only because their chances of winning are slim to none (Halstead & Lind, Washington Post, 3/25-31/2002; Guinier, The Nation, 12/4/2000). Majority party members work to maintain their hegemony by opposing making elections more competitive and accessible (Miller, SF Chronicle, 4/30/2002; Halstead & Lind, Washington Post, 3/25-31/2002). In fact, elected officials not only want to eliminate competition, but they don’t want the poor or ethnic minorities to vote either (Will, In Defense, 10/10/83; Haar & Chedekel, Hartford Courant, 10/29/2000; Dybowska, Voter Apathy, 10/96). That doesn’t seem very democratic to me.
Our electoral process must be modernized to allow alternative political parties and candidates to compete on an equal playing field. Instant runoff voting is a system which would allow people to vote with more freedom, and less fear of wasting their votes (Halstead & Lind, Washington Post, 3/25-31/2002). Also, Massachusetts provides campaign funds to candidates who agree to spending and fundraising restrictions (Miller, SF Chronicle, 4/30/2002). I think a further step would be for the government to establish campaign spending limits for all candidates. Of course, needed reforms will not be forthcoming quickly, as stodgy bureaucrats attempt to maintain their own power.
A Democracy Without Choices Is Not A Democracy At All
America is a representative democracy, meaning citizens participate in government by electing public officials to represent their interests and make decisions on their behalf (JBG, p.34). Some contend that voter apathy, or lack of interest and concern weakens our democracy (American Heritage Dictionary, Houghton Mifflin), but this is simply not the case.
It is very easy to say nonvoters are apathetic, but in fact polls show quite the opposite. Although only 50% of the nation’s eligible voters voted in the 2000 presidential election, 83% of people polled had an interest in a political campaign (JBG, p.218).
I think that many voters do not vote because of a lack of candidates who embody their concerns (Halstead & Lind, Washington Post, 3/25-31/2002). Low voter turnout is likely caused by political cultural conditions of dissatisfaction and dissociation with today’s politicians (National Catholic Reporter, 6/14/1996; Lipset, Why Americans, 2/7/94; Dybowska, Voter Apathy, 10/96; Herbert, NYT, 10/4/96). For example, only 32.3% of eligible voters age 18 – 24 voted in the 2000 presidential election (Haar & Chedekel, Hartford Courant, 10/29/2000; Morin, Washington Post, 1/14-20/2002), not because they are apathetic (Morin, Washington Post, 1/14-20/2002); rather, no candidate expresses the concerns of young Americans (MSS p.257-262). Politicians today are unoriginal, uninspiring, homogeneous, without defining ideologies and out of touch with the masses (Will, In Defense, 10/10/83; National Catholic Reporter, 6/14/1996; Lipset, Why Americans, 2/7/94; Dybowska, Voter Apathy, 10/96; Herbert, NYT, 10/4/96). Just consider the candidates of the 2000 presidential election: illiterate Mr. Bush, and stiff-as- the-redwoods-he-hugs Mr. Gore. Why anyone would waste an hour of their life casting a vote in support of an candidate, who likely has little to say or do, and for whom they have marginal or indifferent feelings, just to feel emotional reward is beyond me (Will, In Defense, 10/10/83; Lipset, Why Americans, 2/7/94).
Furthermore, elections have become irrelevant moneyed popularity contests, epitomized by rhetoric and double talk and false promises (Morrison, LA Times, 11/4/98; Guinier, The Nation, 12/4/2000; Haar & Chedekel, Hartford Courant, 10/29/2000; Dybowska, Voter Apathy, 10/96; Catholic Reporter, 6/14/1996), with the winner being the richest candidate, not necessarily the best one (MSS, p.242-245). Candidates are essentially spoon fed rhetoric to regurgitate for the masses; they possess nary a single original inspiring thought in their dull heads.
Nonvoters do not weaken the idea of representative democracy. They are simply asserting their democratic freedom not to vote (JBG, p.223; Will, In Defense, 10/10/83).
Those who do not vote assert their right not to be represented; those who do vote are represented in our representative democracy. As long as somebody is elected, government will still be representative of those who voted (Morrison, LA Times, 11/4/98). Also, nonvoting can be considered a form of passive consent, with people expressing their contentment or indifference with the election of either homogeneous candidates (Will, In Defense, 10/10/83; Harwood, Washington Post, 11/5-11/90; The Economist, 8/22/1988).
It is my contention is that political system intentionally keeps itself unrepresentative of the nation’s population. The choices, and winners, in national elections, are limited to candidates from the majority Democratic and Republican Parties (Halstead & Lind, Washington Post, 3/25-31/2002), demonstrate no defining ideology (Will, In Defense, 10/10/83; Lipset, Why Americans, 2/7/94). Voters ignore independent candidates, only because their chances of winning are slim to none (Halstead & Lind, Washington Post, 3/25-31/2002; Guinier, The Nation, 12/4/2000). Majority party members work to maintain their hegemony by opposing making elections more competitive and accessible (Miller, SF Chronicle, 4/30/2002; Halstead & Lind, Washington Post, 3/25-31/2002). In fact, elected officials not only want to eliminate competition, but they don’t want the poor or ethnic minorities to vote either (Will, In Defense, 10/10/83; Haar & Chedekel, Hartford Courant, 10/29/2000; Dybowska, Voter Apathy, 10/96). That doesn’t seem very democratic to me.
Our electoral process must be modernized to allow alternative political parties and candidates to compete on an equal playing field. Instant runoff voting is a system which would allow people to vote with more freedom, and less fear of wasting their votes (Halstead & Lind, Washington Post, 3/25-31/2002). Also, Massachusetts provides campaign funds to candidates who agree to spending and fundraising restrictions (Miller, SF Chronicle, 4/30/2002). I think a further step would be for the government to establish campaign spending limits for all candidates. Of course, needed reforms will not be forthcoming quickly, as stodgy bureaucrats attempt to maintain their own power.