Corporations spend millions of dollars to support candidates who are likely to cooperate politically in the future. Candidates, in turn, spend those millions to get the attention of voters. They hope to convince the voter, in 30-second sound bites, with mailers and online videos, the balloter’s interests are best served if that candidate is elected. Politicians and corporations are willing to spend those millions to buy votes because earning them legitimately is prohibitively expensive or impossible. Try as they might, they can’t buy a vote that is not for sale. It is hard not to notice the electoral season; mailboxes are suddenly full of political junk mail, the television shows are now interrupted by commercials for candidates, and water cooler talk about office gossip subsides, replaced by political banter. Radio news talk and the cable talking heads stop talking about the current pop fascination and stupid congressional moves. The rules for civilized conversation are suspended while we all try to make our decisions and convince others to follow suit. Coffee shop discussions buzz jittery political discussions. The long forgotten Electoral College rules are revisited. We are almost completely focused on the presidential election for two months.
The constant jibber-jabber does little to motivate citizens to cast their vote. The American population can hardly be bothered to register, let alone cast a vote. When they vote, they can nary be bothered to research the candidate whose box they check. The average American voters rely heavily on the marketing materials produced to sway their vote. Even though most Americans will never see a dollar of the millions corporations have spent to buy t
heir vote, they happily sell their votes for the cost of their apathy.
During the 2004 presidential election between President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry, only fifty five percent of those people who are registered to vote voted in the presidential election. The election was extremely close, incumbent President Bush winning with 50.8%, just a hair over half. That means less than thirty percent of the registered voting population decided the direction of the entire country. Re-elected President Bush called his win a “mandate” from the American people.
The 2004 election was made all the more infuriating in light of the lessons of the 2000 election. Then Governor of Texas George W. Bush won against then Vice President Al Gore by five Electoral College votes, even though he lost the popular vote by less than one percent. The vote was so close; each vote in one county in Florida was examined closely by teams of examiners because each vote had the power to swing the election in favor of one candidate or the other. In twelve states the margin of win for either candidate was less than 5%. There has never been such a powerful example of the value of just one vote, and yet, instead of empowering the American public, it barely responded. Half of the registered American voters couldn’t be bothered to take three minutes of their time to stop by their polling place in 2004; a gob-smacking example of voter apathy and disenfranchisement.
The apathy of the non-voting public is only the most extreme version of the apathy on which corporations and politicians rely. During the 2000 and 2004 elections, the average voter learned most of what they know about the politicians they voted for through commercials and talk in the media. The majority of American voters sold their vote because they couldn’t be bothered to cut out a little TV time and spend a couple of hours before they voted so they could research their candidates.
The less voters research a candidate, the better it is for both the candidate and the special interests that supports them. For example: a politician says he wants to stop relying on foreign oil. (For the purposes of this example, let’s assume the politician isn’t lying.) A reasonable voter might interpret that statement to mean the candidate is interested in developing alternative fuels or finding green alternatives to energy production. Mr. Apathetic Voter does not take the time to research the candidate’s contributors, and will be left with only their interpretation of the candidate’s statement, and if they say they believe in green alternatives, they will be encouraged by the statement. Ms. Attentive Voter takes the time to research who gave the politician money, which is a matter of public record and is easy to obtain. She learns that the energy company trying to drill offshore or in the Alaskan wilderness donated a significant amount of money to the campaign. An even savvier voter could spend three minutes online and find the voting record of that candidate and might learn that they’ve voted against alternative energy development. Both voters are interested in alternative fuels and environmental issues, but Ms. Attentive Voter’s casts her vote for the candidate who represents her best and Mr. Apathetic Voter votes against his own interest and desires.
Mr. Apathetic Voter has sold his vote for the cost of ten minutes research, a lower cost would be hard to imagine. Staying informed does require attention but it isn’t asking too much of a citizen of a democracy. Corporations and politicians bet that a citizen will let the worries of the day, the latest sitcom episode or other day-to-day concerns to come before considering the best interest of themselves and their family. Uninformed voters are willing to sell their votes for about the cost of the cup of coffee they drink each day, a value for a corporation and candidate.
I would venture to guess that the average American would turn down a six dollar cash bribe for their vote. In the 2004 presidential election George W. Bush spent $5.92 per vote, John Kerry spent $5.52. That is less than the toll to cross the Golden Gate Bridge, two gallons of gasoline, a hamburger, a manicure, six songs on iTunes, going to a matinee movie, a new tube of lipstick, or a can of antifungal foot spray. A direct bribe of $6 would be a slap in the face insult but most voters are willing to sell their vote for little more than a Lincoln by committing to their political apathy.
We profess to love the freedoms democracy allows, but we allow freedom to degrade into atrophy by neglecting to exercise our most fundamental civil right: voting. A candidate should have to work for a vote, but most of us do not force them to pony up the goods to earn our selection. Mr. Apathetic Voter and all his compatriots put their votes up for sale and candidates happily snap those votes up at bargain prices. We can’t complain that American politicians buy votes when our citizens prefer to sell them than treat them as one of the few priceless asset we’re issued. There is a solution to the wholesale voter buyoff in America. It rests in the hands of every person over age 18 in the United States and it is simple. Register to vote. Don’t put a vote up for sale. If a vote is not for sale, it cannot be bought.
Who donated to who? http://www.opensecrets.org/
Register to vote http://www.declareyourself.com/
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html
http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/voting.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2004
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/16/is-it-smarter-to-sell-your-vote-or-to-cast-it/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000#The_general_election_campaign
Photo Credits:
Voting for dummies
http://www.jardmail.co.uk/attachments/voting.jpg
Don’t forget to vote
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a188/BEASTMARIO/dont_forget_to_vote_magnet.jpg
Vote hat pin flag
http://www.hamburg.mi.us/clerk/images/vote-graphic.png
vote pin
First Published: September 13, 2008
No comments:
Post a Comment