Reinventing Democracy (11/7/02)

By Dean Hartwell

In the recent midterm elections, a little more than 39 percent of voting-age citizens in the United States voted. This year ranked as one of the lowest ever in voter turnout.

In a democracy, the people participate in the making of decisions. When three-fifths of the electorate waives the right to have their opinions counted, a small group of people makes decisions on behalf of everyone else. The fewer the voters, the less democratic we as a nation are.

How can we increase voter turnout?

We should connect the degree of voter participation to representation in the state legislatures and Congress. Voting districts that have the lowest turnouts would forfeit their representatives to the districts that have the highest turnouts. Citizens would then think twice before deciding not to vote.

So, if Virginia’s Third District had the lowest turnout, it would give its right to a representative for the next two years to the district in the nation with the highest percentage of eligible voters. Let’s say that district was New York’s Tenth District. New York would have a law on selection, perhaps leaving it to the governor to choose.

We should also recognize the proper relationship between the money the federal government gives to each state and the state’s right to make its own decisions. If a state takes money from the federal government, it should submit to federal law on issues.

For example, some states, such as Nevada, on Tuesday had initiatives about legalizing marijuana for medical purposes. This type of initiative should only be binding if Nevada’s legislature agreed to reduce the amount of federal money they receive. When the consequences of voting are reduced to power or money, voters may well understand the importance of voting.

While we can do very little about the quality of candidates on the ballot, we can change the method by which we vote for them. Some candidates win elections without having received a majority of the vote. We can stop this problem by instituting Instant Runoff Voting, which allows voters to choose more than one candidate in order of preference.

Under this system, candidates failing to get more than 50% of first preference votes would have ballots listing them as a second (or even third) preference counted until one candidate got a majority of them. In Louisiana, Mary Landrieu received 46% of the vote. State law calls for a runoff election in a few weeks between her and the second place finisher. Why wait? With IRV, a second ballot using the second preferences of voters would have decided the winner on Election Night.

If the voters don’t find the candidates or the issues interesting enough, the government should find ways to interest them. By changing how we award representation, how the states interact with the federal government and how we determine winners, we can convince apathetic citizens that voting matters to them.