David Rigsby Rigsby is a second-year
political science student who is annoyed by previously recorded
"live" television. You can reach him at drigsby@ucla.edu. Click
Here for more articles by David Rigsby
I always did want to visit the state of Florida. But after all
of the national attention granted to Florida since November 7th, I
feel like I’ve already been there.
Recently, my friends from CNN, MSNBC and the other major
networks have filled my mind with all sorts of facts and statistics
about Florida. Because of this media saturation, I now know
everything from the number of counties in Florida (67), to its
electoral vote count (25), to even its state bird (the
mockingbird). Because this state has had such a pivotal role in the
outcome of the presidential election, it only seems natural to
mention it when discussing any issue even remotely connected to the
election. So here goes.
Florida. Florida. Florida. Now, with that topic out of the way
for good, it’s time to move on to another one that
hasn’t been beaten like a dead horse.
As Election Day 2000 unfolded, I watched as the polls on the
East Coast closed one after another. The media announced exit poll
results and projected the winner of each Atlantic state at about
8:01 p.m. EST. To me, watching those states turn red for one
presidential candidate or blue for another was like watching a
sporting event.
 Illustration by HINGYI KHONG/Daily Bruin At about 6 p.m.
here on the west coast, when it looked as if Gore had an advantage,
a friend of mine commented that he was unsure whether he really
wanted to go down to the polling booth because, “Gore’s
doing well enough that he doesn’t need my vote.” My
friend did in fact make the trek down to the booth to cast his
vote, but his comment caused me to wonder how the early reporting
of the media affects west coast voters.
I once thought the major disadvantage of living on the west
coast was always having to watch “Saturday Night Live”
taped from a previous live broadcast. But I have come to realize
that there is a flaw in our voting system because the country is
divided into multiple
time zones.
I agree that watching the early election results might not have
a huge impact on some people who have yet to vote. It might,
however, allow registered voters to justify not voting because the
race has already been decided on the East Coast. While voters might
not have been thinking that way about this presidential election
due to the tight race, many of the previous presidential elections
were decided before the polls even closed in California.
Often, the entire west coast is left feeling helpless because
their votes didn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. I
imagine that’s the way Oregon voters feel too, even though
they are clearly mistaken for believing this.
The names of presidential candidates are not the only things on
the ballot. There are still important state and local issues that
need to be decided. These issues truly suffer from the premature
publication of east coast election results. Registered voters who
don’t vote because the presidential race is “already
decided” are neglecting issues and elections that depend more
on their one vote than the national election. Don’t get me
wrong, I feel that each vote is important in all elections, but
there is a greater chance of one vote making the difference in
smaller races, like for a seat on a local school board.
There is no easy solution to the problem of televised east coast
exit poll results. It is possible for the media to restrict the
content and timing of reporting to avoid a west coast bias. The
media, however, doesn’t usually hold back information when
they have it and people want to hear it. The alternative, of
limiting the media by law, is constitutionally out of the
question.
There is a remedy that will equalize the playing field, but it
isn’t a national solution. General elections are administered
by state, and to a lesser extent, by county guidelines.Â
It would be better for all states to open and close their polls
at the same time across the country, regardless of time zone
differences.
This concept of uniform poll opening and closing is not an
impossible solution. Hawaii and California are separated by three
hours, but their polls close at the same time, 8 p.m. PST. By
extending the amount of time that polls are open from 13 hours to
15 or 16 hours, they could encompass times before and after working
hours in the Eastern and Pacific time zones. There would also be a
range of times to vote in Alaska and Hawaii. For example, the polls
could be open from 9 a.m. to 11 p.m. EST, and therefore 6 p.m. to 8
p.m. PST.
Uniform voting across the country allows for the simultaneous
reporting of all election results. Every state that accurately
counted its votes on time would then become colored on those
light-up maps we all love to watch. Voters in the west would not be
influenced by how those in the east voted, and the networks could
still fight to be the first to report their exit poll findings.
If the “Indecision 2000″ crisis has taught us about
anything other than the antiquated electoral college, or the flawed
butterfly ballot, it has showed us that one vote can make a
difference. When half of the registered voters of this nation
can find out who’s ahead before the polls close, it can make
the difference. And it’s the local issues that suffer in the
end.