Elect to end apathy

What if they held elections and nobody came? Los Angeles will
find out today, as the mayoral runoff election will most likely
only attract about one-fourth of the eligible voters.

The 26 percent turnout in the March primaries marked a 16-year
low for a mayoral election in Los Angeles.

Democracy is probably not going to suffer any severe damages if
you don’t go to the polls today. But anybody who is eligible
to vote should think twice before deciding to lay by the pool
instead of making a quick check mark on the ballot.

There are a multitude of reasons why the mayoral elections
don’t excite the average Angelino all that much. Some experts
claim that back-to-back elections, including the recall of Gov.
Gray Davis and the recent presidential race, have worn out
voters.

Others say the timing of the Los Angeles elections is
unfortunate because so much time lies between the primary and the
runoff elections.

The candidates, too, can also be blamed for the lack of
inspiration.

“They just ramble about leadership, unity, the future
being bright and what a great city this is. They have no platform;
they simply utter vague platitudes,” said Walter Moore, a
mayoral candidate in the primary, about the main candidates in the
city election.

Last but not least, the mayor of Los Angeles doesn’t have
much power anyway. The multitude of government agencies that run
the city ““ including the county Board of Supervisors, the Los
Angeles School Board and the city council ““ can confuse even
the most informed citizen. It can be nearly impossible to keep
track of who does what.

Obviously, its easy to blame these things for the low turnout.
But a large portion of the fault lies with the voters.

Let’s look at a recent election where the voter turnout
should have been as high as 100 percent ““ the UCLA
Undergraduate Students Association Council elections. All of the
right ingredients for a large voter turnout were in place: The
elections were held in a tightly knit community where campaigners
could reach potential voters directly. All eligible voters were
automatically registered. Voters didn’t even need to go to a
polling station; they could just vote online. Furthermore, the
people they were voting for control a significant aspect of their
lives by funding campus groups that students care about.

And on top of everything, the student body was able to gather
independent coverage about the election issues from a free
publication that is widely disseminated on campus ““ the one
you’re holding right now.

And what did this textbook example of a voter-friendly
environment yield? A meager 31 percent voted in the primaries, and
just 2 percent more turned out for last week’s runoff. The
Daily Bruin called the turnout “staggering,” and
compared to past years, these numbers are definitely positive news.
But the expectations for this kind of election should be much
higher.

I talked to a number of students on campus on the last day of
the runoff elections. Not surprisingly, only one person I spoke to
had actually voted. The answers I got were all similar and boiled
down to the simple statement, “I don’t care.”

And that’s where I see the root of the problem. The public
has become apathetic toward the democratic process ““ be it on
the community, city, state or national level.

The United States is a good example of a working democracy that
has provided a stable environment for people to live, the economy
to grow, and the sciences to advance.

But democracy doesn’t only work for you ““ it
requires you to give something back as well. It requires you to
keep informed about current events and to build an opinion about
the political process.

I asked political science Professor Lynn Vavreck, an expert in
campaigns and elections, about voting behavior. She said a lot of
people don’t vote because “the costs of becoming
informed are high.” But as I see it, the Internet has
propelled the media into a new age, and it doesn’t require
hours upon hours anymore to get the gist of what’s going
on.

The population of college students is a very privileged one. Not
only do most college students come from families with a relatively
high income, but the resources provided by life at a university
give each student ample opportunity to become politically competent
citizens.

People can keep blaming the politicians, the media and the
electoral system for the loss of democratic participation. But the
first step to improving the political process is for every
individual to realize that voting is not a chore, not a duty, not
even just a right ““ it is a valuable privilege. The fact that
Iraqis flocked to the polls in their recent election despite the
immediate danger of bombings is a good reminder of the passion
democracy can ignite. And some of this inspiration needs to spill
over to elections here.

Vavreck said that the low interest in election participation in
people our age isn’t new: “Every generation that is 18
to 30 years old doesn’t vote.”

It’s time for this trend to change, and for our generation
to make itself heard.

I suggest you view participating in today’s runoff mayoral
election as a good opportunity to make a statement, a statement
that politics do matter to you, that you honor democracy, and that
you won’t give away your voting rights to apathy.

Starre is a third-year English student. If you’re a
politically competent citizen, e-mail him at
astarre@media.ucla.edu.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *