Voter Apathy in the US and Its Implications for the Quality of American Democracy - Case Study Example

Voter Apathy in the U.S. and its Implications for the Quality of American Democracy It is a singular thing that, given the sufferings and injustice that mankind has endured over the course of the last two millennia, today in many countries (though certainly not all) there exists a system of government which is not only accountable to the people but made of up of legislators whom they directly elect. Most of human history has ever been witness to some sort tyrant or despot ruling by decree and not by consent wherein his power came from his ability strike fear into the populace and not by his capacity to satisfy its wants and political demands. The importance of the individual voter has long been a great one in the historical development of American democracy. From its inception American democracy claimed (though perhaps not always fulfilled) as sacrosanct the duty of the government to answer and implement the ‘will of the people’. It was Thomas Jefferson who once said as much. [Our] government is a collection or result of the wills of all. That government is a collection or result of the wills of all. That if any government could speak the will of all, it would be perfect; and that so far as it departs from this it becomes imperfect. It has been said that Congress is a representation of states; not of individuals. I say that the objects of its care are all the individuals of the states.1 With the gradual expansion of suffrage, not only men but also women and minorities came to play a role in the expression of the “general will.” With the passage of the 17th Amendment which mandated the popular election of Senators, all legislators and the President became dependent upon the acquisition of a virtual electoral majority in order to legitimately hold office. By the 20th century then America very much epitomized the ideal of a modern democracy. Modern democracy does substantially differ from its ancient Athenian predecessor. Rather than the direct voting on all laws by the citizenry, it instead elects representatives who themselves vote on the passage of laws. Democracy is after all the compound of two Greek words: demos meaning ‘common people’ and kratos meaning ‘rule, strength’.2 So in order to influence the legislative process the voter must necessarily take part in the election of representatives. In a modern democracy there is also the responsibility of the government to protect the rights of all, including minorities of any kind. The tyranny of the majority cannot be allowed to exist anymore than that of the tyrant himself. Thus modern democracy not only requires a voting public but also an informed and activist one. The wishes of the many must be balanced with the needs of the few. As well the voter must keep the government in check so as to keep it accountable and prevent it from becoming despotic. All of this necessitates an active and participatory citizenry. Unfortunately in the United States of the last several decades an increasing number of potential voters are not upholding what amounts to their civic duty. The reasons can and must be analyzed but the consequences for American democracy in general are fundamental: they include the very withering and destruction of the institution itself. As it stands today America’s voter participation is abysmally low not just compared to its own past levels but also when compared to other countries across the globe. It was starting in 1971, with the ratification of the 26th Amendment, that Americans of eighteen years of age or older could vote. This ‘opened the voting booth door to more Americans than ever before’.3 It is perhaps a supreme irony then that in the ensuing decades, American voter participation fell to its lowest levels ever. This low voter turnout is evident in all age groups, though most egregiously so in the 18-30 year old category. Compared to other democracies, the country that once referred to itself as the “Arsenal of Democracy” seems to have few weapons at its disposal. [T]he United States ranks 140th among the world’s 163 democratically elected governments, between Chad and Botswana...Even in 1960, when we had our highest levels of turnout, our turnout was lower than most democracies...Voter registration procedures have been simplified, for example, and there are more college graduates and more older people, groups that are most likely to vote. ‘If you take away these factors...what you’re left with to explain today’s lower turnout is motivation’.4 The extent, degree, and reason for this lack of motivation all depend on a variety of factors, but to deny its preponderance would prove a difficult exercise. One major cause of the loss of motivation is the feeling on the part of certain age groups and ethnic groups that their vote does not matter. This is not to say that many Americans do not seem to take pride in their country or its values, but it does seem to mean that many of them think the government incapable of living up to those same values. The weakened level of American voter interest is a phenomenon many years in the making. The developments that have diminished Americans’ interest in election politics are deep rooted and unlikely to be reversed easily or soon...the weakening of the political parties, the rise of candidate-centred campaigns, the emergence of a hypercritical press, and the decline in electoral competition-will continue to characterize American politics for years to come.5 This loss of motivation and participation did shock some pundits when it began to conspicuously materialize starting in the 1960’s. Voting levels in the 1940’s and 1950’s ebbed and flowed, but by the late 1950’s had reached a high point which many attributed to the high number of Americans then graduating from university. The subsequent drop has often been attributed to the weakening social and political hold of the main political parties.6 Voter disenchantment with the two main parties, the Republicans and the Democrats, was most evident in the two most recent presidential elections. In 2005 study the percentage of Americans who openly called themselves Democrats was 35.9% and 31.3% thought of themselves as Republicans. In that same study 32.9% of Americans affiliated with neither party and instead chose the title of ‘independent’. This was the single highest number of confessed independent voters since such tracking began.7 It appears that most Americans feel that the two parties are simply unresponsive to their needs. ‘[P]eople tend to be motivated to action only if they feel that this action leads to the desired goal’.8 The risk is that with so many people disengaging from what they see as a futile political process, there is the very real possibility of the government abandoning any pretence of accountability and wantonly becoming corrupt and/or autocratic. The issue of negativity in election campaigns can also be blamed for some of the low voter turnout. General disenchantment with the parties has contributed to this. To be sure negative and/or acrimonious political campaigns have long been a part of American history. ‘Candidates have discovered that it is easier in many situations to attract swing voters by tearing down ones opponent than by talking about ones own platform. Research indicates that negative advertising has more than tripled since the 1960s’.9 The loss of party allegiance among the voters and a general shift toward issue-based voting has played a role in disenchanting many voters. Politicians simply seek to appeal to voters’ feelings based on a few key issues. Instead of being able to appeal to party loyalty, these politicians simply promise something different to each group they meet which further degrades their standing in the eyes of voters. This policy-based ‘malleability’, coupled with campaign negativity, has both contributed to voter ‘apathy’.10 Having such a high degree of the public disgusted with the country’s politics has been shown to be potentially disastrous throughout the course of the last one hundred years of Western history. With respective to minority groups, particularly African Americans, the reasons for low voter participation are very much deeply historically rooted. For much of the country’s history Blacks were not even legal citizens but rather slaves. After the end of the Civil War in 1865 they were granted citizenship and suffrage. The hardships they endured even after slavery left an indelible mark upon their collective conscience. The use of literacy tests and other devices made them feel as if there vote did not count. [In places like] late nineteenth century Arkansas, the secret ballot was one such new requirement. Of course in Arkansas, as in the South more generally, the secret ballot was only one of several measures adopted by Democrats to disenfranchise black (and poor white) voters. Poll taxes, literacy, grandfather clauses, and residency requirements were variously used as well...Illiterate voters, finding the new system to be degrading and alienating, stayed away from the polls.11 Though today African Americans no longer face any legal restrictions on their vote, they still have very low voting rates. The same can be said for other minorities and even women. These sections of society already feel marginalized by the overall power structure and thus think that voting will change very little. A feeling of electoral disenfranchisement, even if it is not due to a legal barrier but rather to a social perception, has kept many minorities away from the polls. It has long been suggested that minorities have not received proper representation in majority-based election battles. That would exclude the presidency but would include the House and Senate. Some have suggested that the fact that many elections only require a simple majority (51% or more) instead of ‘super’ majority of 66% allows the ethnic majority in America (those of European descent) to maintain political and electoral dominance. ‘[R[equiring supermajorities (or successive majorities in separate institutions) not only helps to protect a minority from the majority, but also encourages the majority to confer and compromise with those who hold different views’.12 This contributes to the perception held by many minorities that their political hopes and desires have little chance of success and thus opt to abstain from the political process altogether. During the American Constitutional Debates of the 1780’s it was said that Experience has taught mankind, that legislation by representatives is the most eligible, and the only practicable mode in which the people of any country can exercise this right, either prudently or beneficially. But then, it is a matter of the highest importance, in forming this representation, that it be so constituted as to be capable of understanding the true interests of the society for which it acts, and so disposed as to pursue the good and happiness of the people as its ultimate end.13 The obvious consequence of this is not only to disenfranchise a whole segment of the population, but also to contribute to inter-ethnic rivalries and differences which can often lead to civil strife and conflict. In a similar vein, the issue of identity and generational differences have also to some extent contributed to voter malaise. With the rise of a multicultural America, some have argued that it has become increasingly difficult to achieve consensus. Though democracy is lauded across the world as the most just system of government, it does allow for one to vote for one’s own group’s good and not for the ‘general’ good of the country. In recent decades, especially in America, with democracy has come the rise of ‘identity politics’. One’s ethnicity has gained in electoral importance. The individual sometimes wants only to vote for someone of their own group (ethnic, social, gender, etc.). After all, ‘the toughest kinds of political issues [are] the mutually contradictory assertions of identity that define a divided society’.14 This has in many cases further alienated voters who feel that the country is so hopelessly divided that the possibility for consensus and moving forward is beyond their reach. This has further contributed to the breakdown of American democracy and inter-ethnic relations and even has possibly imperilled the future of the country. The issue of age and generation has also fuelled the perception that the voter is helpless to affect any real change. The so-called ‘Generation X’, the generation that followed the Baby Boomers, has demonstrated a particular inertia when it has come to exercising its voting rights. Many have pointed to this being the first generation in American history not to have seen its standard of living substantially improve over that of its parents’ generation. ‘Since 1973, median earnings for men aged twenty to thirty-four have fallen by almost a third’.15 This has lead to pervasive disillusionment in the ‘American Dream’ which has been reflected in low voter turnout. The other age group which today in America has shown itself to be especially derelict in its duty to vote is the young. ‘[A]pathy among the young [is] a global trend towards political demobilisation. Abstention is understood as both a political and emotional response to economic marginalisation and social isolation.16 Akin to the Generation X-ers, America’s youth feel alienated from their elders and, in the current economic climate, left on the periphery of available economic opportunities. For the future of America’s democracy, this is especially troubling. It was Tocqueville who adeptly observed that ‘citizens learn political skills via participation in voluntary organizations’.17 The election process imparts its participants with a respect for and loyalty to the country in which it takes place. With so many young Americans failing to take part in the country’s elections, there is a real risk of an entire generation becoming totally disconnected from its country’s political heritage. American democracy, for the time being, is surely here to stay. The difficulties it faces are similar to those present in many of the other countries of the democratic world. That said, there does seem to be clear evidence that many doubt the ability of the government, and thus the electoral process, to realize the public will. With so much dissatisfaction and voter apathy, there is surely a long-term risk to the viability of the American political system itself. Barack Obama, the first-elected African American to the presidency, campaigned on a message of ‘Hope and Change’. ‘Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real’.18 He won by one of the largest majorities in recent history. Yet he has still to demonstrate his ability to deliver on his promises. Meanwhile, many Americans have either maintained their apathy or turned to more fringe or peripheral parties and/or politicians. With the right to vote available to more people in the United States than ever before, there should be a groundswell of citizen involvement in the country’s politics. Instead there is disinterest or dissatisfaction. This all poses the very serious risk that America’s democracy will one day change from rule by the people to a rule by the few. Bibliography Bowler, Shaun and Donovan, Todd. “Democracy, Institutions and Attitudes about Citizen Influence on Government.” April 2002 British Journal of Political Science 32:2, 26 February 2010. “Brutus IV.” 29 November 1787 New York Journal. Cooper, Mary H. “Low Voter Turnout.” 20 October 2000. CQ Researcher. 26 February 2010. “Democracy.” November 2001. Online Etymology Dictionary. 26 February 2010. Online at http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=democracy Dryzek, John S. “Deliberative Democracy in Divided Societies: Alternatives to Agonism and Analgesia.” April 2005 Political Theory 33:2, 26 February 2010. Gates, Jeff. Democracy at Risk: Rescuing Main Street from Wall Street. Cambridge, Massachussetts: Perseus Publishing, 2000. Haider-Markel, Donald P. “Lose, Win, or Draw: A Reexamination of Direct Democracy and Minority Rights.” June 2007 Political Research Quarterly 60:2, 26 February 2010. Hill, Lisa. “Compulsory voting, political shyness and welfare outcomes.” March 2000 Journal of Sociology 36:1, 26 February 2010. Jefferson, Thomas. Writings. New York: Penguin Books, 1984. Jost, Kenneth. “The Obama Presidency: Can Barack Obama deliver the change he promises?” 30 January 2009 CQ Researcher. 26 February 2010. "Number of Democrats Falls to New Low, Republicans Decline Too." 1 August 2007. Rasmussen Reports. 26 February 2010. Patterson, Thomas E. "Can Anything Be Done to Increase Voter Participation." 17 December 2002. History News Network. 27 February 2010. —. "Where Have All the Voters Gone?" 18 November 2002.” History News Network. 27 February 2010.  —. "Why Do So Many Americans Hate Politics?" 25 November 2002. History News Network. 26 February 2010.  Rosenberg, Morris. “Some Determinants of Political Apathy.” Winter 1954-1955 The Public Opinion Quarterly 18:4, 26 February 2010. Schaffer, Frederick Charles. “Might Cleaning up Elections Keep People Away from the Polls? Historical and Comparative Perspectives.” Jan. 2002 International Political Science Review 23:1, 26 February 2010. Read More