Voting and/or/vs Non-Voting

To begin with and for the record... I vote.

And I don't vote lightly, either. I take it seriously. Just like I take jury duty seriously.

However, the two are not the same, largely because voting is not a duty (i.e. it is not mandatory, at least not in this country).

It is a right (at the macro level; that is, in the aggregate) and a privilege (at the micro level; that is, for any particular individual). [1,2,3,4,5, 6, 7, 8]

But it is not a duty.

That doesn't stop some from thinking about it that way, though, or from attempting to frame the debate in such a manner.

Every election season I hear people imploring their fellow man (or woman, or why not just "citizen") to get out and vote, to be represented, to "let their voice be heard."

But largely our voices are not heard.

When a [let's assume male] politician votes a certain way, he doesn't poll his constituency. He votes his conscience (if you're a purist), or his donors' conscience (if you're a cynic). And he sometimes goes against both and votes his re-election.

I have never witnessed a politician say "I don't have any strong opinion one way or the other on abortion," (for example), "so I'm going to poll my constituents.

Gordon Tullock, one of the greatest living economists without a Nobel Prize to his name, explains just how much our [individual] vote counts:




I was surprised after this latest bout of elections to see an article by John Carney (on CNBC, of all places) that forgave non-voters their 'sin' in a hopefully-intentionally manner.

It is for all of these reasons and more that I defend non-voters and the concept of non-voting.

On one of the favorite economics-related blogs in my blogroll ("in my Google Reader account" is probably more accurate), Agoraphilia, blog co-author Glen Whitman tries to make a libertarian case against non-voting... and despite (IMHO) making the argument only half-heartedly (and probably only half-seriously) still manages to be quite convincing.

Granted, some people do not vote out of any rational calculation. They are apathetic, they forget, whatever. This post is not about those people. Rather, it is about the ones who decide to not vote based on at least some form of cost-benefit analysis.

As I mentioned to a dear childhood friend in a recent Facebook post, the reason is not always apathy:

Just to clarify, some people would take issue with the premise ("If you don't vote, your apathy..."). The reason is not 'apathy' for everyone who chooses non-voting. The vast majority of people who don't vote probably do so out of apathy. But some people have principled reasons for not participating in the process, even if I don't agree with them (e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses, such as the Williams Sisters, who don't participate for religious reasons; some journalists, such as Newsweek/WaPo columnist/editor Robert J. Samuelson, for reasons of 'impartiality'; and some people, who believe that by doing so, they are sanctioning evil).

What are your thoughts? If you are a non-voter, did I cover your reasoning/rationale? If you are a voter, had you ever even considered the possibility of principled, informed non-voting? Do you agree or disagree with the concept of "non-voting" categorically, or is there any particular justification that you find particularly interesting or abhorrent? I am particularly interested in any glaring (or otherwise) problems voters and non-voters alike can find with any of the logic undperpinning any of the reasons discussed here.






Citations/Footnotes:

1. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (2006:Jan.19). "The Right to Vote," The Nation.
2. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (2003:Nov.22). "Fighting for a 'Right to Vote' Constitutional Amendment," Position Paper, FairVote "Claim Democracy Conference," Washington College of Law, American University.
3. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (2004:Sep.07). "Do Americans Have The Right To Vote?" National Press Club, Washington, DC.
4. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (undated). "The 'Right To Vote' Amendment," Democrats.com.
5. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (2005:Mar.10). "The Fundamental Right You Don't Have," TomPaine.com.
6. Jesse Jackson, Jr (2005:Jan.6). "Our Voting System Needs A New Constitutional Foundation," Floor Statement during Challenge to Ohio Election. CommonDreams.org
7. FairVote (undated). "Right to Vote Frequently Asked Questions," The Center for Voting and Democracy.
8. ACSblog (2011:Sep.13). "Does the U.S. Constitution Guarantee Americans an Affirmative Individual Right to Vote?" American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.
9. Gordon Tullock [interview] (2008:Aug.22). "Voting Schmoting," WGBH Lab.
10. John Carney (2010:Nov.02). "It's Okay That You're Not Voting Today," CNBC.com.

Of interest:
asdf (). "Row over vote orgasm video," asdf

Updates:

http://www.theonion.com/video/diebold-accidentally-leaks-results-of-2008-electio,14214/

http://www.theonion.com/video/voting-machines-elect-one-of-their-own-as-presiden,14286/



Some links above have expired. As of 10/23/2014, this list is current:
http://www.thenation.com/article/right-vote
http://archive.fairvote.org/?page=2344
https://web.archive.org/web/20110413120128/http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/il02_jackson/sp040907DoAmericansHaveTheRightToVote.shtml
http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=12581
https://web.archive.org/web/20080918115231/http://www.tompaine.com/articles/the_fundamental_right_you_dont_have.php
https://web.archive.org/web/20130529093917/http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0106-35.htm
http://www.fairvote.org/reforms/right-to-vote-amendment/right-to-vote-f-a-q/
http://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/does-the-us-constitution-guarantee-americans-an-affirmative-individual-right-to-vote