Today, Utah's Republican voters will go to the polls to decide who will be on the November ballot in the race for governor, as well as two congressional contests and various legislative races.
The primary has the potential for major voter turnout. There is no incumbent running for governor, and Republican U.S. Rep. Chris Cannon is facing a challenge from anti-immigration activist and former state Rep. Matt Throckmorton. The Cannon-Throckmorton race, with its debate on illegal immigration, should bring out voters in droves.
We hope turnout is high, though that hope is tempered by the record of past elections. Utahns talk a great game about loving America and its institutions, but many of them can't be bothered to perform their most basic civic duty -- voting. In the 2000 primary, a paltry 19 percent of the electorate bothered to go to the polls. Even the historic Mountain States Primary, touted by then-Gov. Mike Leavitt as a golden opportunity for the West's voice to be heard in presidential politics, only got 10 percent of the voters to cast ballots.
The Republican Party's decision to close its primaries to all but party members hasn't driven up voter participation. In 2002, the first closed primary, only 12 percent of voters came out.
It's a perplexing problem. When you look at other countries with fledgling democracies, you see close to 100 percent voter participation. You also see people willing to risk their lives to cast ballots in countries where an old totalitarian regime makes a last violent attempt to stop democracy, such as Haiti and the Philippines.
So, how come we can't get American citizens to vote?
In some cases, it may be that people don't think their vote counts or that the candidate they would have supported didn't have a chance, so why bother.
It may also be a belief that none of the candidates are fit for office. Rather than choosing the lesser evil, some people decide to show their disgust by not voting at all.
The closed Republican primary also hinders potential voters. Most voters are unaffiliated, with no declared allegiance to any party. A primary election that forces people to declare party affiliation means that such fiercely independent people are denied participation.
Mostly, though, we think people are just apathetic. Watching TV is more interesting than voting. Voting requires standing up, getting in the car, driving to the polls and engaging the brain.
Moreover, prosperity breeds laziness. There are no issues that seem important enough to many people to motivate them to influence the outcome.
How do we solve the problem? Here are some ideas:
Give voters a tax credit if they vote. It's been said that the most sensitive part of the human body is the wallet. If people can get a modest break on their income tax, say a $100 credit, by casting a ballot, more people might vote. It's the opposite case in Australia, which actually fines people for not voting. In America, we believe it should be one's right to abstain from voting, but with a tax credit the abstention would be in the voting booth by marking a box labeled "I abstain." That way, everyone is treated equally, and there's an incentive to go to the polls.
But a tax credit would be expensive. At $100 per voter, it could cost as much as $10 billion nationally. With a country already mired in debt, taking that much money out of the federal budget is not a good idea. The solution to this problem is simple: Just raise taxes by $10 billion, then give back the credits. The country may end up with a net gain.
Open primaries. There are many occasions, especially in Utah County, where the primary election is the only time people can vote for elected officials. This happens when there is no challenger from an opposing party. Closed primaries in this case send the message that people who are not Republican cannot choose who will represent them.
An open primary would be more inclusive and give the winner a true mandate from the people, rather than just the support of party loyalists.
Instant runoff voting. This system, already in place in Australia and used in Utah's Republican convention, has voters rank all candidates in order of preference. The candidate who scores lowest is eliminated and his votes are reallocated to surviving candidates whom supporters indicated as second choices. This process is repeated until someone emerges as a clear winner.
This system allows people to vote for third-party candidates without fearing that they've thrown away their votes: If the third-party candidate scores low, the second-place vote then applies. The process assures that a winning candidate is truly the majority's preference.
Allow voters to pick "None of the above." This option would allow voters who are dissatisfied with all candidates on the ballot to let their position be known in no uncertain terms. It's the equivalent of leaving a penny tip at the restaurant. If a winning candidate sees a high percentage of "none of the above" votes, they'll know they have some fence mending to do. It would also tell party leaders to find better candidates.
In the meantime, the best reason to vote is to give yourself license to complain. If you don't vote, you deserve whatever you get and should keep quiet.
The primary has the potential for major voter turnout. There is no incumbent running for governor, and Republican U.S. Rep. Chris Cannon is facing a challenge from anti-immigration activist and former state Rep. Matt Throckmorton. The Cannon-Throckmorton race, with its debate on illegal immigration, should bring out voters in droves.
We hope turnout is high, though that hope is tempered by the record of past elections. Utahns talk a great game about loving America and its institutions, but many of them can't be bothered to perform their most basic civic duty -- voting. In the 2000 primary, a paltry 19 percent of the electorate bothered to go to the polls. Even the historic Mountain States Primary, touted by then-Gov. Mike Leavitt as a golden opportunity for the West's voice to be heard in presidential politics, only got 10 percent of the voters to cast ballots.
The Republican Party's decision to close its primaries to all but party members hasn't driven up voter participation. In 2002, the first closed primary, only 12 percent of voters came out.
It's a perplexing problem. When you look at other countries with fledgling democracies, you see close to 100 percent voter participation. You also see people willing to risk their lives to cast ballots in countries where an old totalitarian regime makes a last violent attempt to stop democracy, such as Haiti and the Philippines.
So, how come we can't get American citizens to vote?
In some cases, it may be that people don't think their vote counts or that the candidate they would have supported didn't have a chance, so why bother.
It may also be a belief that none of the candidates are fit for office. Rather than choosing the lesser evil, some people decide to show their disgust by not voting at all.
The closed Republican primary also hinders potential voters. Most voters are unaffiliated, with no declared allegiance to any party. A primary election that forces people to declare party affiliation means that such fiercely independent people are denied participation.
Mostly, though, we think people are just apathetic. Watching TV is more interesting than voting. Voting requires standing up, getting in the car, driving to the polls and engaging the brain.
Moreover, prosperity breeds laziness. There are no issues that seem important enough to many people to motivate them to influence the outcome.
How do we solve the problem? Here are some ideas:
Give voters a tax credit if they vote. It's been said that the most sensitive part of the human body is the wallet. If people can get a modest break on their income tax, say a $100 credit, by casting a ballot, more people might vote. It's the opposite case in Australia, which actually fines people for not voting. In America, we believe it should be one's right to abstain from voting, but with a tax credit the abstention would be in the voting booth by marking a box labeled "I abstain." That way, everyone is treated equally, and there's an incentive to go to the polls.
But a tax credit would be expensive. At $100 per voter, it could cost as much as $10 billion nationally. With a country already mired in debt, taking that much money out of the federal budget is not a good idea. The solution to this problem is simple: Just raise taxes by $10 billion, then give back the credits. The country may end up with a net gain.
Open primaries. There are many occasions, especially in Utah County, where the primary election is the only time people can vote for elected officials. This happens when there is no challenger from an opposing party. Closed primaries in this case send the message that people who are not Republican cannot choose who will represent them.
An open primary would be more inclusive and give the winner a true mandate from the people, rather than just the support of party loyalists.
Instant runoff voting. This system, already in place in Australia and used in Utah's Republican convention, has voters rank all candidates in order of preference. The candidate who scores lowest is eliminated and his votes are reallocated to surviving candidates whom supporters indicated as second choices. This process is repeated until someone emerges as a clear winner.
This system allows people to vote for third-party candidates without fearing that they've thrown away their votes: If the third-party candidate scores low, the second-place vote then applies. The process assures that a winning candidate is truly the majority's preference.
Allow voters to pick "None of the above." This option would allow voters who are dissatisfied with all candidates on the ballot to let their position be known in no uncertain terms. It's the equivalent of leaving a penny tip at the restaurant. If a winning candidate sees a high percentage of "none of the above" votes, they'll know they have some fence mending to do. It would also tell party leaders to find better candidates.
In the meantime, the best reason to vote is to give yourself license to complain. If you don't vote, you deserve whatever you get and should keep quiet.
Election Day '09 was a roller-coaster for election reformers. Instant runoff voting had a great night in Minnesota, where St. Paul voters chose to implement IRV for its city elections, and Minneapolis voters used IRV for the first time—with local media touting it as a big success. As the Star-Tribune noted in endorsing IRV for St. Paul, Tuesday’s elections give the Twin Cities a chance to show the whole state of Minnesota the benefits of adopting IRV. There were disappointments in Lowell and Pierce County too, but high-profile multi-candidate races in New Jersey and New York keep policymakers focused on ways to reform elections; the Baltimore Sun and Miami Herald were among many newspapers publishing commentary from FairVote board member and former presidential candidate John Anderson on how IRV can mitigate the problems of plurality elections.