posted April 27, 2008 02:52 PM            

quote:

---

Only 54 percent of eligible voters cast their ballots during the last four decades of presidential elections. Compare that embarrassing number to Italy's 90 percent, Germany's 80 percent, France and Canada's 76 percent, Britain's 75 percent and Japan's 71 percent. We rank 35th in voter turnout out of the world's prominent democracies.

Lessons taught...and forgotten

What must our kids think of these shameful statistics? What's the lesson learned? Our voter apathy and lack of civic responsibility certainly show them that we don't believe in the privilege and the obligation to vote. Kids should learn that all voters, regardless of their income, education, race or ethnic background, have equal power to influence our democracy.

What's disturbing about this voter turnout tragedy is its demographic disparity. Those voters on the bottom rung of income and education are voting at rates half those of their wealthier, well-educated counterparts. What's fueling this indifference--feelings of powerlessness, cynicism, and hopelessness? Every child, regardless of family income or educational status, deserves to believe that her political voice is strong.

These economic and educational disparities are virtually non-existent in Europe. In this regard, political scientist Mark N. Franklin reports that the United States stands alone among other progressive democracies. In these other nations, he says, "whether people vote is hardly at all affected by their socioeconomic status and hence the resources they bring to the political world."

Teaching by example

Beyond the obvious need for a national grassroots effort to increase voter turnout, what can we do to teach our children the importance of voting in a free society? We can talk with them about how our country was formed because of a desperate thirst to break free from tyranny. We can tell them of the heroic, historic struggles of women and African-Americans to take their places at the voting booths. We can educate them about the crucial issues involved in any vote we cast, whether it's a local town referendum or a presidential election.

But above all, we can vote. And, if possible, we can take our kids to the polls with us so they can begin to feel democracy at work. Parents who express their gratitude and political power by casting a ballot may inspire their kids to take a stand in the future.

---

posted April 27, 2008 11:26 PM            

Later, when I have more time, I'll share why I'm tempted to stop voting. Also, why one feminist was opposed to women's suffrage. And I'll also share a speech from a teen speaking for the National Youth Rights Association on why teens should be allowed to vote, and why they want to. And others. Just to understand some of the different thoughts out there.

But for now, I think this is a good start:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/27917.html
Excerpts:

quote:

---

What's remarkable about this election wasn't the errors and deceit in the counting rooms. It's that the tally was so tight that it was worth a cam-paign's time to point those problems out. Close up, the making of lawmakers turns out to be as ugly as the making of laws

---

quote:

---

If an election really came down to your one ballot, it now appears that the results will be challenged in court -- assuming, that is, that your vote wasn't already miscounted, misplaced, or spoiled. You might as well have stayed home or written in your dog: It would've had as much effect on the outcome as voting for Bush, voting for Gore, or putting a bullet in your head the night before.

---

quote:

---

When political scientists "modeled" this contest, they said Gore would win in a cakewalk: The incumbent party, they explained, always wins in times of peace and prosperity. Whoops. If the Federal Trade Commission really cared about truth in labeling, it would force the nation's political science departments to strip the word "science" from their names

---

quote:

---

This year, the Democrats nominated a centrist who, but for a tiny handful of positions, might as well be a Republican. The Republicans nominated a centrist who, but for a tiny handful of positions, might as well be a Democrat. Both failed to inspire much passion, except the negative kind. And both aimed their campaigns at moderate swing voters. (Gore made some occasional and entirely unconvincing rhetorical forays into populism, but those weren't an expression of his larger strategy; they were an effort to swat the Nader challenge.)

So it's scarcely surprising that the country's vote split down the middle. What's surprising is that so many observers have taken this to mean that -- to quote David Broder -- "It was as if two different nations went to vote yesterday." Please. There are deeper divisions between Jay Leno and David Letterman than there are between Bush and Gore. This country has plenty of rifts, but it has been years since we've had a presidential election that managed to ignore as many of them as this one did.

---

Btw, Gore vs. Bush doesn't sound unique. It was too much like Kerry vs. Bush, or even Clinton vs. the Republican of 1996.

Although I think if you asked most people and they felt like explaining it, they'd sing (or at least think of) this song:

Let's get up and vote!
Let's make our voices heard!
We've been given the right to choose between a douche and a turd.
It's democracy in action.
Put your freedom to the test.
A big fat turd or a stupid douche?
Which do you like best?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnPiw0917W8

Speaking of which, that episode that plays that song (aired just before the 2004 election) was not only brilliant, IMO, about the "cult of voting" and what the choices typically are, but exceedingly popular even among people who otherwise don't like the show.