Running Head: Why Americans Do Not Vote

Running Head: Why Americans Do Not Vote

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Why Americans Do Not Vote

Voting in America has a very low turnout, 40 to 90 percent of USA citizens do not vote during elections. Throughout the whole of the United States of America, for both national and local elections most Americans citizens stay at home during elections. Voting permits citizens to make their voices to heard, but in America, most citizens do not. There are more than 250,000,000 voting-aged individuals in the United States. While some are excluded from voting for elected leadership and ballot initiatives due to their criminal history or immigration status, the overwhelming majority of adults residing in this country are eligible to vote. Yet, even the most high-profile elections of the past decades only boast turnouts hovering in the 50- 60% range – quite low in comparison to other developed countries.

A hundred million Americans who are eligible to vote routinely do not due to a lack of faith finds. In 2016, nearly 100 million eligible Americans did not cast a vote for president, representing 43% of the eligible voting-age population, representing a sizeable minority whose voice is not heard in our representative democracy.  There is not a one-size-fits-all description of the non-voting population, nor is there a single, unifying explanation for their lack of participation. Age, gender, education, socioeconomic status, and race can impact whether a person votes. The reason might be a combination of disenfranchisement, long lines, complicated mail-in-ballots, and even suppression. But that still doesn’t fully explain the politically disengaged that have eluded researchers for decades. Research shows that non-voters are more likely to be low-income, young, Hispanic, or Asian American. Several barriers tend to get in the way for people living in poverty, and the US census found that 47% of eligible citizens with household incomes of less than $20,000 didn’t vote in 2012. Sunday is the most common voting day around the world, except in the US. Election Day falls on Tuesdays in the country and is not a federal holiday, presenting a dilemma for many workers who don’t get paid time off to go to polling place and wait in line. While early voting and mail-in voting gives citizens more flexibility, not all states offer these options.  Caltech and MIT of registered and non-registered voters who didn’t cast a ballot in the 2008 election suggested that people of color are more likely not to vote because they encounter more barriers to voting, compared to white citizens who tend not to vote by choice. Various laws and structural systems, from limited early voting windows to ID restrictions, disproportionately affect people of color and contribute to voter suppression across the country. The emerging electorate is even less informed and less interested in politics:  Young eligible citizens (18-24 years old) are even less likely than non-voters to report following political news are, and feel less informed than non-voters come election time. Fewer are interested in voting in 2020 than non-voters, principally because they do not care about politics. They also struggle the most with the voting process. When directly asked in the national survey why they do not vote, the top reasons non-voters gave were that they do not like the candidates (17%), they do not know the candidates and issues (13%), and they feel that their vote does not matter (12%).

A hundred million Americans who are eligible to vote routinely do not due to a lack of faith in the system and/or failure to engage with candidates, a report from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation finds. ““Voting is very hard to prioritize. If I need to feed my kids or if I need to vote, I’m feeding my kids.” -Male non-voter, Philadelphia “I don’t have faith in the electoral process or faith in the current government. Most of the representatives don’t look like me, do not sound like me, don’t come from where I come from and don’t represent who I am.” -Female non-voter, Philadelphia. Political fragmentation; the number of parties that contest an election can affect voter turnout, since  availability of more parties gives more options to voters, hence increasing their desire to vote.

America’s citizen turnout has been poor as of late. So helpless that solitary 36.3% of qualified electors ended up casting votes in the 2014 midterm political decision. This was a depressed spot for the U.S. since there has not been a turnout this low since 1942, an aggregate of 72 years. Nevertheless, how does the United States contrast with other popularity based created nations? The Pew Research Center finished a study of the best 34 created nations. The U.S. positioned 31st in citizen turnout. The turnout was determined from data with respect to the 2012 general political race. All of the countries surveyed were part of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). A stunning 90% of registered voters cast a ballot in the country’s national elections last year, as well as in the last European Parliament elections in 2014.That’s pretty remarkable, given that average voter turnout for European elections reached an all-time low of 43% in 2014, down from a high of 63% in 1979. For comparison, 61% of eligible voters took part in the 2016 US presidential election, while just 49% voted in the 2018 midterms the highest voter turnout since 1914. Anyone who applies for a voting card two weeks before elections, that states that will be fined for not voting. Eligible, unexcused voters who don’t vote have to pay a fine of up to €10 ($11.15) the first time, and up to €25 ($27.88) the second time. If an unexcused voter fails to vote at least four times over 15 years, they are struck off the electoral register for 10 years.

Compulsory voting keeps politics focused on the centre rather than the fringe of politics. To win elections, political parties have to appeal not just to their base but to the majority of people. Australia is also one of only a few countries with preferential voting, which means a voter ranks candidates in order of preference, compared with most countries where the candidate with the most votes wins. It ensures that those elected have the support of the majority of voters. “It keeps the emotional temper of the conflict down,” says Brett. “That’s become more evident recently with the way politics has gone in the United States, where you’ve had issues around sexuality and race being used to motivate voters. If you need to get out the vote, you need to have things that people are going to feel passionate about, and that’s not necessarily such a good thing.”But, like many of the more than 20 countries worldwide with mandatory voting laws, Belgium rarely enforces the sanctions. In more than 15 years, nobody has been sued yet for refusing to vote. So why do people still turn out in droves for elections?

International IDEA Voter Turnout Trends around the World affected by poverty do not have access to even a basic education that would enable them to understand how their vote is expected to affect the direction of government policies. Political factors; Closeness of elections. The decision to vote is influenced by the probability that an individual vote will have an impact on the election result. Therefore, the closer the election between parties or candidates is expected to be, the higher the likelihood that voters will cast their vote. Perception of the political issues at stake. The degree to which different election outcomes might lead to a different direction in the policies of the government on important issues will affect turnout. If, for example, the political parties contesting an election have different agendas on how to resolve a specific economic problem that affects the majority of the population (e.g. lack of housing), this will have a significant impact on citizens’ desire to vote in order to elect the party that best represents their views on the issue. Campaign expenditures. More money spent on campaigning increases awareness of an election, which can affect the feeling of ‘civic duty’ among citizens. Greater resources can also enable wider distribution of political information, which helps citizens to obtain the necessary information about candidates and political party platforms. On the other hand, there is increasing concern globally about the role of money in politics (International IDEA 2015). The involvement of large amounts of money in election campaigns, mainly from private donors, is creating intense debate about the impact of the richest segments of the population on national policies.

Television ads are staple modern political campaigns. Commercials are usually the tactic of first choice, most visible sign of activity and the most expensive aspect of campaigns (Fritz and Morris, 1992; Goldenburg and Traugott, 1984; Morris and Gamache 1994), where advertisers can afford and political circumstances dictate.TV Candidates’, groups and parties combined to spend at least $1.6 billion on TV ads in 2004 (Memmot and Drinkard, 2004). Jameson (1996) observes that exactly what the money buys is a subject of concern among observers. According to Green and Gerber (2004), approaches that are more personal are likely to spur voting than less personal appeals. Mobilizing voters is fundamentally a “retail” activity where potential voters respond to direct engagement from canvassers and “high quality” phone callers (Nickson, 2006). Advertising on TV is classic “wholesale” politics an identical message delivered to people at once. Unlike public service announcements that implore people to vote and are moderately successful, (Vavreck and Green, 2006), presidential ads rarely mention voting or going to the polls.  Campaigns view voter turnout as a separate task, a division of labor   evident in the 2004 campaign as both sides strived to create grassroots organizations of paid and volunteer workers (e.g, Fesseden 2004; Halbifinger, 2004). While, TV ads seem to have little to no impact on voter turnout, they are not ineffectual since they are a cost effective means to attract votes. Hurber and Arceneaux (2007) suggest that tv ads fit in neither the minimal effects nor maximal effects thesis; rather, their effects are dependent on the dependent variables’ nature.

References

Bergan, D. E., Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Panagopoulos, C. (2005). Grassroots mobilization and voter turnout in 2004. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69(5), 760-777.

Fessenden, F. (2004). A Big Increase of New Voters in Swing States. New York Times, A1.

Fritz, S., & Morris, D. (1992). Handbook of campaign spending: Money in the 1990 congressional races. Cq Press.

Green, D. P., & Vavreck, L. (2006, April). Assessing the turnout effects of Rock the Vote’s 2004 television commercials: A randomized field experiment. In Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL (pp. 20-23).

Huber, G. A., & Arceneaux, K. (2007). Identifying the persuasive effects of presidential advertising. American Journal of Political Science, 51(4), 957-977.

International idea. (2015). Voter turnout database.

Commission on Federal Election Reform, Center for Democracy, Election Management, Carnegie Corporation of New York, Ford Foundation, John S., … & Pew Charitable Trusts. (2005). Building Confidence in US Elections: Report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform. Center for Democracy and Election Management, American University.

Commission on Federal Election Reform, Center for Democracy, Election Management, Carnegie Corporation of New York, Ford Foundation, John S., … & Pew Charitable Trusts. (2005). Building Confidence in US Elections: Report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform. Center for Democracy and Election Management, American University.

Krasno, J. S., & Green, D. P. (2008). Do televised presidential ads increase voter turnout? Evidence from a natural experiment. The Journal of Politics, 70(1), 245-261.

Memmott, M., & Drinkard, J. (2004). Election ad battle smashes record in 2004. USA Today, Nov, 25.