Low Voter Turnout: You Have More Options Than You May Realize

In the 2012 Presidential Election, 93 million eligible voters did not vote.  In contrast, 126 million eligible voters did vote.

It is undeniable that had those 93 million potential voters actually voted, the election’s results could have been drastically different.  The problem is that they didn’t vote.  But why?

Many experts suggest that voter turnout is lowered when potential voters feel political discontent and disengagement coupled with a feeling that their votes are ineffectual in regards to public policy.  Many voters feel that a vote either way feeds into the status quo and that regardless of who they vote for, their voices and concerns will not be heard.  Thus, they do not vote.

Additionally, type of election, electoral competitiveness, demographics and voting laws all affect voter turnout.

Not voting is a problem because a non-representative portion of the population is essentially speaking for the whole country.  Since there is such a diverse pool of citizens comprised from all walks of life and opinion, there should be a diverse pool of options and votes.  But when only a small portion of each walk of life is actually voting, the rest of the voices get tossed to the side.  Voter feedback is crucial to guiding public policy: the voters are the public.  Policies should be formed around the public’s needs and wants.

But democracy does not serve the general public if the general public does not participate in their elections.

Fortunately for the prototypical voter in the U.S., there are more options than just voting for the status quo.  The various forms of protest votes and proposed electoral reforms currently available could help to shape the face of elections to better represent the totality of the American public.

The numerous types of protest votes can be as varied as the candidates and issues on the ballot.  Although not voting is often touted as a protest in its own right, the effectiveness of non-voting as a form of political protest is almost nonexistent, as uncast ballots are generally attributed to voter apathy (not caring) as opposed to voter dissatisfaction.  This is due to the fact that uncast ballots have no way of broadcasting a reason for the non-vote.

The most popular form of protest vote in America is voting for a fringe, deceased, fictional or nonexistent candidate, thus creating a null vote.  These votes, when cast in an unusually high  number (which begs the question, with Libertarian and Green parties consistently polling relatively low, what is unusual?), can cause the election’s validity to come into question, thus potentially leading to electoral reform.

Another form of a null vote protest is to ‘spoil’ a ballot.  One can deface a ballot instead of actually casting a vote, filling out the ballot in such a way that the voter’s decision is unclear (by filling in multiple choices, filling out the ballot in an incompatible way, making unnecessary marks on the ballot, etc).  These ‘spoilt’ votes are still counted among the null votes and become part of the protest statistic, rather than the apathetic statistic.

Blank (or white) voting is a self-explanatory form of protest vote: the ballot is left intentionally blank, showing disapproval towards all options standing.  Hailed by some as “the tool of the vanguard of discontented citizens,”  these ballots create yet another form of null voting that, when counted in unusually high numbers, draw questions to the validity of the election.

Selecting a “None of the Above” (none) or blank vote is yet another way voters can express their dissatisfaction in available choices.  Unfortunately, the U.S. has no valid “None of the Above” or blank option available on any of its ballots, so a voter must physically write NONE on the ballot.  This ballot action typically leads the ballot to be considered null and added to the pile of null votes.  

Previous attempts to allow a “None of the Above” option in California and Nevada have failed, usually losing by ⅔ of the vote.  Imagine if every eligible voter actually participated in the vote, instead of the usual non-representative voices: a “NONE” option could have been entirely viable.  The impact this could have had on future elections in those states is markedly tenable.

If we are being honest, these forms of protest voting lend more voice to the politically discontented than simply not voting.  These ballots have the explicit advantage of being counted, recorded, and acknowledged.  

While not voting does have an impact on the election, it’s not the impact we think: it merely allows a non-representative population of voters to speak for the entire population of voters instead of being registered as a plaintive protest lodged against the current options.  When there is a systemic discounting of non-votes being passed off as apathetic, their impact as a protest is severely mitigated.  For protests to be effective, they must be seen and acknowledged.

While protest votes may be well and good in showing disfavor and drawing attention to the viability of an election, the real change stems from systemic electoral reform.

Popular voter reform initiatives proposed include Ranked Choice Voting, a “simple” voting system change that allows voters to rank candidates that they support instead of simply voting for the candidate they oppose most, and Fair Representation, a culmination of multiple voting initiatives designed to give more representative power to the American voter meant to deconstruct the winner-take-all nature of current U.S. elections.

One thoroughgoing measure for voter reform is the attempt to guarantee voting as a constitutional right, appropriately named the Right to Vote Amendment.  Designed to combat “voter registration problems, lost or miscounted votes, language barriers, felony convictions, and targeted voter disenfranchisement,” this proposal has seen varied success at local and national levels.

Various cities in Florida have passed similar Right to Vote measures, guaranteeing citizens of these cities the ability to vote.

H.J.Res.25 is the latest proposed constitutional amendment currently being introduced to the 114th congress.  In short, the amendment states that “[e]very citizen of the United States, who is of legal voting age, shall have the fundamental right to vote in any public election held in the jurisdiction in which the citizen resides.”

Another proposed reform, universal voter registration, attempts to tackle the fact that our current opt-in system is riddled with voter errors, omissions, and duplications by switching to an opt-out system that will supposedly eliminate the complexity of our voter rolls.  The system is meant to automatically enroll and register any and all eligible potential voters, with the reigns being handed to the government to run the program.

In relation to universal registration, a push for automatic youth pre-registration has also been proposed and gaining traction in congress.  Citing that “59% of eligible voters age 18-24 are registered,” yet “in 2008, 83% of registered 18-24-year-olds voted,” the initiative addresses the fact that registration encourages voter turnout, especially among younger voters.  The misconception about this proposal is that it lowers the voting age, yet this is untrue.  It simply puts younger voters on an automatic registry that enrolls them as registered voters upon turning 18.

The bottom line is that there are a plethora of options for the discouraged voter, from voting practices to actual voting reform.  Any concerned or motivated citizen can become active in any of these options and by getting involved they allow for their voices to finally be heard.

No more hiding behind a curtain of unheard silent protest; one must act if one wishes to truly see change.