Next, one has to consider whether institutional or attitudinal electoral influences is more persuasive when explaining the voter turnout decline observed since the 1960’s. Piven and Cloward’s notion that party systems, electoral practices, and institutional barriers discourage and limit voting, as seen with the and Motor Voter Act, can remain true, but should be analyzed through the lens of registration. The Motor Voter Act was successful in regards to increasing registration and interest in voting. However, there was no significant increase in the voter turnout after the Motor Voter Law was implemented. Concerning Powell’s studies that voter turnout is disadvantaged by party systems, registration requirements, distance to voting location, …show more content…
While higher education has not stimulated voter turnout as expected, it has still had an effect on maintaining some voters. Education teaches one a sense of civic duty, a need to uphold democratic ideals, and simply the basis of understanding politics. Additionally, many of the explanations discussed in this paper have opposing complementary effects; meaning, the reasons for why people do not vote are also rationale for why some still do. Politicians and their parties have mobilization strategies to engage certain voters, and if you are in their demographic, then the election comes to you instead of you needing to seek it out. Likewise, electoral barriers do not impact everyone. On the social side of this conundrum, lies the fact that some still value partisanship, social capital, and the benefits of voting. Even though they are all on the decline does not mean they are removed altogether. Similar to what the Civic Voluntarism Model proposes, if one has the time, money, ability, a preference, and efficacy to vote, then many continue to do …show more content…
When California voter turnout rates were at a record low, the state elections chief pleaded, “It’s not a right to vote, it’s a special gift, bestowed to our country by our forefathers and paid for with blood of many generations of our ancestors.” If the government is already aiming to please the elites, the fact that the poor, uneducated, and even the masses, are not voting, only adds to the the problem. Lawmakers need to appeal to their constituents, especially to certain group’s needs, but can only do so if they are participating. An easy fix would be to enact compulsory voting to ensure that everyone’s voice is heard. Former California Secretary of State, Bill Jones, called this notion “un-American,” but I would argue that Putnam, Piven and Cloward, and Teixeira view a low and declining voter turnout as just as
In recent years, “requirements for photo identification have been hotly debated” (Drew A16). There are many different views of both political parties. While mostly Democrats are opposed to these laws, the main proponents who have been promoting voter-ID requirements are Republican state lawmakers claiming that they are needed to help prevent voter fraud. “Republicans say that large jumps in the immigrant population have also prompted them to act to safeguard elections” (Lizette A1). In other words, Republicans are claiming that fraudulent voting is an issue in the electoral process and having to provide further identification such as a photo ID is a solution.
We see multiple successes of voting equality attempted through amendments, however, the Supreme Court’s decision on Shelby County v. Holder has pushed back years and years of effort for voting rights. Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling was in Shelby County’s favor, stating that the Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional along with Section 5. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr, who wrote the majority’s opinion, said that the power to regulate election was reserved to the states, not the federal government. As a result to the court’s decision, the federal government can no longer determine which voting law discriminates and can be passed. After the case, many states had freely passed new voting laws; the most common voting law states passed
Nowadays, the young generations are not aware of how important it is to go out to a poll and vote. Without the votes, voter turnout will continue to decline. The citizens should be more aware of what is going on, fight for their beliefs and issues, and make a
Voter Turnout in Texas As stated in the prompt voter turnout in the state of Texas is amongst the lowest in the nation. Many people seem to be confused or in awe as to why Texas has such a low voting rate. The truth in reality is that there are quite a few reasons why the turnout in Texas is so low.
In the world of politics, voting is one of the most vital aspects to politicians, the local community, and the state. It gives the people who live in the communities a chance to let their voice and opinions be heard through their choice of who they want to represent them in political office or to take care of their town or city. Although many share this opinion, there are people who do not care to vote and do not get involved in politics. What is the underlying reason for this group of people to distance themselves from political affairs? Registering to vote can be a deterrent for many people because it requires effort to file all the correct paperwork and stay in good standing, which may be the cause for low voter turnout within Texas.
Every citizen has the right to vote, but not everyone does these days. It’s important that all people vote in the country and compulsory voting will assure that, because voting is not just a right, it’s a responsibility like Jury duty. Throughout the history voting laws had changed from time to time and from country to country and till now 30 countries around the world had used compulsory voting and got effective results and their countries developed due to good elections that were built in people’s opinion. Voting is considered like paying taxes nowadays, even though it is a responsibility and a duty for them to do towards their country, some people support it and others don’t. The advocates of the compulsory voting argue that
The United States currently faces a severe problem with one of their governmental processes. In the democratic system of the United States, politicians are elected by voting from the citizens, in most cases. The problem the United States is facing is that people are no longer voting in elections for officials. This problem is discussed in the article, “In praise of low voter turnout”, written by Charles Krauthammer. The main idea behind this article is that voters are no longer interested in politics, as they were in previous generations.
By examining their respective statistical outcomes and implications on the political landscape, the perspective of system effectiveness can be determined. It is also important to understand that in the event of a change in electoral systems or any case of electoral reform, voter engagement and response to electoral issues and events will be altered compared to the original format and experience. Historically, in periods of increased popularity toward electoral reform, there are certain benchmarks that tend to stay constant. Voter turnout tends to follow a significant decline in such periods of time as well as significant increases in opposition support for electoral reform in the same period (Leduc, 2009, 23; Elections Canada, 2019). However, the Ontario Citizen’s Assembly, a group of randomized Ontario citizens designed to educate the selected group members and create a proposal for whether electoral reform in Ontario would be beneficial and the specific type of electoral reform that would be the most beneficial.
Evidence of this is in ”Unequal Participation: Democracy’s Unresolved Dilemma, American Political Science Review, Vol.91 No.1” by an Australian supporter of compulsory voting, this states that by compelling people to vote, we are likely to arouse them with an intelligent interest and to give them a political knowledge that they do hold at present process. This evidence helps explain why Americans should be required to vote because, if people don't vote, nothing will get fixed, for example: schools, offices, and, libraries. Although, it is possible to understand why some people might think that Americans should not be required to vote. They could say that people are dishonest and have the right to choose, or how compulsory voting is a restriction.
It is clear that American voters tend to avoid local elections and off-year elections. Run-off elections are also likely to register lower voter turnout as compared to first-round elections. The larger the gap between first round elections and run-off elections, the higher the decline in voter turnout. Moreover, there are lower percentages of young people voting as compared to the older population. This is an important point to note since it highlights that young people do not have information guiding them on the importance of voting.
The right to vote was a privilege given to only a particular group of people in the past. The right to participate in the judicial system to some is an honor. This process allows people to voice and chose who they want in office or what issue they want to support. Voter Id laws are incorporated into our society as a form of control in order to keep people silent. Voter id laws are under controversy because the law is viewed as being discriminatory against minorities.
I agree with Rick Shenkman’s opinion about ignorant voters nowadays. Even though our generations receive more education than people did in the past, those knowledge only lasts until the end of an exam or quiz. For students, most of them couldn’t care less about subjects or matters that are not included in their future careers or majors. As the generation is falling deeper into an endless hole of ignorance, they realize they also have to perform the duties of an American citizen, voting. They rush through news and articles, rely on others’ comments to formulate their own opinions without having a strong foundation on political parties and ideologies; thus making false accusations and decisions.
As recently as 1964, about 66% of voters could be class voters, however since then there has been a process of ‘class dealignment’, as the link between class and voting has weakened more and more. However, many do still vote by class, so it cannot be said it has no influence. Despite this ‘class dealignment’, many voters still seem
Mandating voting made "discourage the political education of the electorate" (text 2, line 20) by forcing some voters to "choose candidates arbitrarily or for the wrong reasons because they do not want to be find or punished for not doing their hypothetical duty" (text 3, lines 31-32). Random voters do not legitimize a democracy and its ideals, but rather contradict it, for their participation was forced and insincere. If voter turnout is in decline as it is stated in text four, then what difference do careless votes make just to simply avoid penalty? It all comes down to the politicians themselves. "It is much more likely politicians will fight for the welfare of the poor and uneducated if they have to go out and seek their vote" (text 4, lines 24-25).
In an ideal democracy, voters will vote for the politicians and policies that can bring the most benefit to themselves, while the rules of the society cares about how to maximize the social welfare as a whole. However, in reality, people find