November 2nd
Twenty four years ago, on the Tuesday of the first full week in November, I dutifully filled in my absentee presidential ballot (for John Anderson, who was running as an independent).
I've voted in every election that I've been eligible since then.
As a citizen of a democracy, it is my civic responsibility to vote. And I take that responsibility very seriously. I vote in primaries, I vote in special elections, I vote in general elections.
This year it's especially important to vote, regardless of whose side you support, your candidate needs your support. It's critical that EVERYONE who can vote, vote.
This year, it looks like Washington State is going to have an 85% turnout of registered voters, which is likely to be the highest since WWII. I am indescribably proud of this statistic (OTOH, in 2000, 74% of the registered voters voted, which was only 56% of the voting age population)
Unfortunately, the turnouts in other states aren't nearly as good, for instance, in 2000, only 55% of the registered voters in Oklahoma turned out to vote (48% of the voting age population).
With an election that is this close, and with what appear to be concerted efforts to suppress the vote in close contests, it is even more critical that everyone take time off from work and vote. As I said - I don't care who you vote for, just that you vote.
If you don't vote, then you don't get to complain.
Valorie chased down the following poem by John Greenleaf Whittier that was read on NPR this morning. It's a bit florid (it was written in 1848) but it says it well:
THE POOR VOTER ON ELECTION DAY.
THE proudest now is but my peer,
The highest not more high;
To-day, of all the weary year,
A king of men am I.
To-day, alike are great and small,
The nameless and the known;
My palace is the people's hall,
The ballot-box my throne!Who serves to-day upon the list
Beside the served shall stand;
Alike the brown and wrinkled fist,
The gloved and dainty hand!
The rich is level with the poor,
The weak is strong to-day;
And sleekest broadcloth counts no more
Than homespun frock of gray.To-day let pomp and vain pretence
My stubborn right abide;
I set a plain man's common sense
Against the pedant's pride.
To-day shall simple manhood try
The strength of gold and land;
The wide world has not wealth to buy
The power in my right hand!While there's a grief to seek redress,
Or balance to adjust,
Where weighs our living manhood less
Than Mammon's vilest dust,--
While there's a right to need my vote,
A wrong to sweep away,
Up! clouted knee and ragged coat
A man's a man to-day
1848.
Tomorrow, back to technical stuff.
Comments
- Anonymous
November 02, 2004
>If you don't vote, then you don't get to complain.
That is wrong, and that statement really bugs me. Elected officials represent everyone in their constituency, not just those who are eligible to vote and did vote. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
Jacques,
If you don't vote, then you have no right to complain about the performance of the person in office. If you don't like his performance, then you should have voted to kick him out.
If you voted, then you're making an assertive choice. Passivity is not a choice. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
I completely agree with you Larry.
Although I sense Jacques is speaking more from a standpoint of someone who is not eligible to vote - such as a minor or non-citizen. Those, of course, being special cases. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
Note that "suppress the vote" is usually a euphemism for trying to prevent voter fraud. If we really want every vote to count, shouldn't we make every effort to ensure that only living, eligible voters are allowed to vote? The incidents of dead people, pets, voting multiple times, etc. are extraordinaril well-documented. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
Donnie,
If the parties involved were working to prevent voter fraud for ALL registered voters, then I'd be willing to call it as a voter fraud prevention measure.
But for some reason, the only registrations that get challenged seem to be for a single party, and I've only seen one party mentioned in the media (both conservative AND liberal media) as being dedicated to avoiding voter fraud.
I can only think that if the one party that is trying to reduce voter fraud is doing it by trying to reduce the number of fraudulent voter registrations for the other party, that they're not doing it because they legitimately want to reduce fraud, but instead because they believe that it helps their cause. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
Hmm.... NPR - I know which candidate you voted for :-) - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
Actually, DeepICE, you don't know :) I'm fiercely independant, and I vote for both democrats and republicans.
I think that NPR's the best news source from 6:30AM until 9:00AM in the morning (between when I get up and when I get to work), that's why I listen to them. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
"... regardless of whose side you support ..."
You said it, Larry! - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
The 1st amendment gives us all the right to complain. Its protection is not contingent on whether or not we vote. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
Actually, the 1st amendment doesn't give you the right to complain.
First off, the only thing that the first amendment does is to prevent the government from stopping you from speaking. It doesn't guarantee the right to unlimited speach (a subtle difference).
Second, yeah, the government can't stop you. But by not voting, you CHOSE to not make a choice. And if you didn't make a choice, you have no moral standing to complain about the consequences of your inaction. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
Well said. Vote if you can.
"I can only think that if the one party that is trying to reduce voter fraud is doing it by trying to reduce the number of fraudulent voter registrations for the other party, that they're not doing it because they legitimately want to reduce fraud, but instead because they believe that it helps their cause. "
Then the other party should be doing the same thing. That's the nature of adversarial systems like ours. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
The 1st amendment protects me both from the government and from the mob who would silence me with the "love it or leave it"/"no vote, no voice" rhetoric.
I didn't/wouldn't make any claims about rights to unlimited speech*. That would be silly.
"Moral"? Good heavens! I thought this was about rights. I don't feel I'm qualified to judge on moral grounds.
* 2 e's; no a. :-P - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
Drew,
Yeah,I know I can't spell :)
I'm not sure that the 1st amendment protects you from the mob. It prevents the government from stopping you, but it does not force the government to give you a protected soapbox. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
"I think that NPR's the best news source from 6:30AM until 9:00AM in the morning (between when I get up and when I get to work), that's why I listen to them. "
Amen! I listen to Morning Edition on my way into work, and All Things Considered or Marketplace when I leave work.
NPR is actually very neutral in their reporting. Their reporters and interviewees do a great job keeping their personal opinion out of the way. When NPR does interview a person who is from the left, they are always careful to also have someone from the right.
In my opinion they are one of the best sources out there for general news. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
I like to quote Plato on this:
"The penalty for not participating in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors."
Plato goes a step further than you, Larry. It is not only important to cast your vote (or actively refuse to), it is also important that whatever you vote for, you do so because you agree with it. That brings me to a second quote, from Buddha this time:
"Do not believe in anything because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.
But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and the benefit of all, then accept it and live up to it.
"
Way too many people vote simply what they are told to (by their elders, the church, teachers, et cetera).
Participating in politics is more than just voting whenever you're eligible to do so.
And even if you're not eligible to vote, you still have the social obligation to participate in politics.
So, I would say: not participating in the political process voids your complaints. - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
November 02, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
November 03, 2004
Actually, another major protection the constitutional founders consistently had was prevention of the tyranny of the many. This is useful both in the declaration of free speech (for unpopular minorities, as well as for majorities), as well as for elections and representation, as it is also a thread used for our Congress. (Representatives being population based, and Senators being state based)
This theme is also reflected in the electoral college vote. It can reasonably protect the smaller states from large voting blocks like Los Angelos or New York City (notice I did not reference the states) as completely overriding all of Rhode Island's or the Dakota's state voters.
Something else I think of is that David Brinkley said during the wee hours of Election night 2002 was something like "If this had been a popular based election, then every precinct in the entire United States would be eligible for challenge by lawyers, and the chaos would not be localized to Floride and Arizona alone."
On another note, I also listen to NPR, because while I do think they have some of the best news, I think they are a little left of center, but they give enough variety of articles, it satiates my omnivorousness for information. - Anonymous
November 03, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
November 03, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
November 03, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
May 31, 2009
PingBack from http://woodtvstand.info/story.php?id=4111