Tag Archives: voter apathy

local news, national news, political news

Why the disinterest?

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

An earlier post on this blog saluted the “courtesy” that Princeton City Hall gave to its residents with a significant credit in their monthly water bill.

I intended to call attention to local governments’ ability to respond to taxpayers’ needs in time of suffering. Princeton answered the call.

Now, for my point: It is that government at the local level often is the most responsive and its actions have the most direct impact on citizens’ lives. Thus, it baffles me that local government elections usually draw such little attention among voters.

Local government responds | High Plains Blogger

You know what I’m talking about. Voter turnout for municipal elections often languishes in the single digits. That is, fewer than 10 percent of those who are registered to vote bother to actually vote. I have witnessed this astonishing apathy play out over and over again during by 37 years as a daily print journalist. I watched it happen in Oregon City, Ore., in Beaumont, Texas, and in Amarillo, Texas, where I worked before retiring and moving to Princeton. It’s happened here, too.

Texas is going to the polls again on May 1. We will choose our city government and school district elected leaders. Will many of us even bother to vote? Hah! I am not holding my breath.

And that is the ongoing shame of our democratic process.

The 2020 presidential election produced an astonishing turnout among registered voters, something on the order of 65 percent. The raw numbers of voters, more than 158 million, also was staggering. Don’t misunderstand me. Presidential elections are important as well. However, presidents and those we send to Congress make decisions that occasionally have little to do with our daily lives.

City council members decide how much property taxes we pay; they make decisions on the quality of police and fire protection, on our parks, whether we have streets lights in our neighborhoods and, yes, whether we have potable running water. School board trustees decide how much to pay public school teachers, which has a direct impact on our property taxes, the books our children and grandchildren read, the curriculum they study.

I am not suggesting we should treat national elections with the apathy we demonstrate at the local level. I am suggesting that local races deserve at least as much of our attention as those elections farther up the electoral pecking order.

local news, political news

Early votes are in: Turnout looks so-so

The early votes have been tabulated for the upcoming Amarillo City Council election.

The numbers do not bode well for a barn-burning turnout. Officials say 7,992 votes were cast early.

Let’s do some math here.

The city is home to roughly 90,000 people who are eligible to vote, give or take. That means about 8 percent of the total voting population has cast ballots. The question now becomes: How many more will do their civic duty on Saturday, aka Election Day?

My experience with early voting — and I don’t believe in voting early if I don’t have to — I that it means only that more people vote early. Fewer of them vote on the actual Election Day. It hasn’t boosted turnout by itself.

My friend Chris Hays, general manager of Panhandle PBS, put together a great video promoting the need to vote. I’ve posted it once already on this blog. Here it is again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jJQeEQH6pc

The election has been contentious at times. It has featured some serious accusations of poor prior public service performance. Challengers to the incumbents have said the city is too secretive about its plans for downtown’s revival; incumbents have answered that the city has made downtown redevelopment plans available for public review.

There’s an element of folks in the city who want to see a wholesale rejection of the incumbents who are seeking re-election; four of the five are on the ballot.

Local media have published plenty of letters and guest columns hyping candidates and causes.

I hope for a big turnout on Saturday, right along with everyone else.

That ol’ trick knee of mine, though, tells me it’s going to fall a good bit short of what we all should want: greater — if not full — participation in representative democracy.

national news, political news

Mandatory voting? Bad idea, Mr. President

President Obama believes big money has too much influence in determining who gets elected.

I agree with him.

He also suggests that mandatory voting is a constructive reform that would counteract big money’s pervasive idea.

I disagree with that idea.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-suggests-mandatory-voting-might-be-a-good-idea/

The president spoke at a town hall and pitched the idea of requiring citizens to vote to an audience. He said other countries require it. He cited Australia as one example.

Allow me to argue that one of the many aspects of “American exceptionalism” is the notion that Americans are free to vote or not vote. We proclaim our love of liberty and while I bemoan constantly the hideous voter turnouts — particularly in state and local elections — I remain enough of an optimist to think we can browbeat complacent citizens to get off their duffs and vote.

We elect presidents with, say, 60 percent turnouts. Political scientists are happy to see that kind of turnout. I find it disgraceful. That means 40 percent of the eligible population doesn’t care enough to vote for those seeking to lead the greatest nation on Earth.

But should we force people to vote?

I’m dubious of that requirement. The freedoms we enjoy should include the freedom to be apathetic. It’s individuals’ call.

Besides, requiring people to vote removes the great political putdown that many Americans — myself included — are proud to utter when the situation presents itself: If you haven’t voted, then keep your trap shut.

But, yes, the president is correct about one aspect of his remarks. Big money wields way too much power.