Op-ed column: A real choice By David Schlosser, candidate for U.S. Congress
Week of 21st June 2006 In ninety percent or more of America's legislative races, voters have no real choices. When they established our representative democracy, America's founders never envisioned this virtually complete absence of political competition. Voters respond by staying away from polling places in droves on Election Day, asking the logical question: "If I can do nothing to influence the outcome of this election, why bother to vote?" One very simple reform can answer that question. Adding the option of "none of the above" (NOTA) would immediately restore the ability of voters to influence an election by withholding their consent to be governed by candidates they do not trust to represent them. Since our political system emerges from the idea that our representatives govern with the consent of the governed, NOTA would give real meaning to elections which mandate that voters must do nothing in order to express their displeasure with their choices - or, more to the point, their lack of choices. Ralph Nader described the tragic outcome of this bizarre situation: "You stay home in order to protest and when you stay home you do not count nor can you send a message that has any effect nor can you set in motion any changes." Although supporters can detail a variety of different methods for making NOTA work, the basic implementation is simple. Voters would have the option of choosing a candidate for a particular office or choosing "none of the above." If NOTA receives the most votes for an office, election officials would hold special elections until a new candidate earns the consent of the governed, or that office would remain unfilled and unfunded until voters choose a candidate in the next regular election. Typically, candidates defeated by NOTA cannot run in those subsequent special elections, but can stand for office in the next regular election. John Murray of the Washington State Campaign for Democracy believes that NOTA "provides a way to tally an explicit protest vote. It gives citizens a veto and a real choice. They no longer are stuck having to select the lesser of two evils. They do not have to pick from a slate of the unworthy, the unknown, and the unopposed. They can veto all the candidates presented to them and demand a new election with better candidates." The mere concept of permitting citizens to exercise that kind of influence over their rulers terrifies the incumbent politicians from both major parties. In states as diverse as Arizona, Colorado, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming, supporters who managed to get NOTA introduced as legislation have suffered defeat at the hands of Republicans and Democrats who prefer gerrymandered and race-based districts that effectively guarantee reelection. Only in Nevada do voters have an opportunity to express their true preferences, yet - because the NOTA option in Nevada is non-binding and applies only to statewide races - they do not have an actual choice. While the United States has never tried a binding NOTA option, except in some states' judicial retention elections, parliamentary governments around the world are subject to a rough equivalent in their votes of no confidence. The Soviet Union and Eastern European states used NOTA to help defeat traditionally unopposed communist candidates. Boris Yeltsin declared that the Soviet version of NOTA "helped convince the people they had real power even in a rigged election and played a role in building true democracy." Interestingly, the only people who seem to really dislike the concept are the politicians who would be subject to its ability to remove them from office. Among liberal and progressive leaders, The Nation magazine, the Boston Globe and Nader endorse NOTA. Conservative and libertarian supporters include The Wall Street Journal and the Manchester Union-Leader. Elections officials across the country are desperate to bring voters represented by that spectrum of opinion to voting places on Election Day. Despite advance voting, extended voting, permanent absentee voting, mail balloting, laws to encourage accountability in campaigns, laws to discourage negative campaigns, and laws to publicly fund elections, voter turnout continues its steady decline. But, as the great sage Yogi Berra once remarked, "if people don't want to come to the ballpark, how are you gonna stop them?" Voters are not too busy or uninterested to vote. They prefer none of the above, but have no mechanism other than abandoning their civic obligations to vote in order to withhold their consent. Allowing voters to choose "none of the above," rather than forcing them not to vote, would give politicians a powerful incentive to actually run for office, rather than using attack ads and smear campaigns to convince citizens not to vote for their opponents. This would improve the quality of debate in elections from city council to president, giving voters the option to make better choices - even in races where candidates are running without opposition. When NOTA earns a substantial percentage of the vote without forcing another election, it would signal a weak incumbent who would have to improve his or her performance and who would likely face a strong opponent in future elections. NOTA should make elections more meaningful to Americans, since they would not have to vote for a presumed losing candidate, with whom they really do not agree, just to register their protest or withhold their consent. And, special interests that now spread their largesse across all candidates to guarantee post-election access could no longer expect that their money went to a winner, which would make the wisdom of lavishly financing incumbents a more uncertain scheme. The failure to include NOTA requires silence from those who do not consent to representation by the candidates on their ballot - something never imagined by our country's founders, who made the right of free speech number one on their Bill of Rights. Ultimately, NOTA returns the power in the electoral process to voters, where it belongs. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/TISQkA/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/KlSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
