Common Cause - Holding Power ResponsibleCommon Cause - Holding Power Responsible

Topics
Our Issues
Money in Politics
Election Reform
Media and Democracy
Ethics in Government
Government Accountability
Press Center
Research Center
Register to Vote

Sign Up and join the Community - click here

What if they threw an election and no one came?

So Tuesday saw some primary elections across the country.  Now, primary turnout is traditionally pretty low.  In Virginia, however, voter turnout reached embarassing lows -- only 3% of eligible voters statewide went to the polls to decide which Democrat would face Republican Senator George Allen in November.  Three percent!  

Only 49 people in Norton bothered to cast a ballot for who will challenge Sen. George Allen this fall.

That was the lowest turnout of any jurisdiction in the commonwealth. Pretty much everyone else in this city of 4,000 was over at the Best Friend Festival, a week-long celebration featuring bubble-gum-blowing, watermelon-seed-spitting and limbo contests. That evening, the festival drew 2,000 people to express their fundamental right to karaoke.

Election? "I heard nobody mention it," says Joyce Payne, chief executive of the Chamber of Commerce, which organizes the annual festival. "I'm sure it was important to people who are very concerned about politics." If you can find such a person.

This Washington Post column has more details on the race, including the interesting dichotomy between Northern Virginia and the rest of the state, as well as the implications of such low turnout for the campaigns involved.  Check it out if you're interested.  Which, if you're in Virginia, will probably only be about 3% of you.


Tags: Virginia, in the states, elections, voter turnout (all tags)


Display:

3% is abysmal

Virginia was my adopted home for many years, and the first place I ever voted -- I know you guys can do better than that!

by Kirstin Ellison on Thu Jun 15, 2006 at 02:21:53 PM EST


Norton's got nothing on Mount Crawford

I know it's a little ridiculous to keep commenting on my own blog entry, but low voter turnout is a special pet peeve of mine.  Here's a Richmond Times-Dispatch piece on a precinct where not a single voter turned up.

by Kirstin Ellison on Thu Jun 15, 2006 at 02:35:46 PM EST


Problem's Not Just Back East

Unfortunately, we had the same problem in New Mexico last week, Kirstin. See this article about voter turnout in NM's primary (sorry about using the full URL): http://www.abqtrib.com/albq/nw_local_state_government/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19859_4759845,00.html. I suspect uncontested races, uncompetitive races and general voter distain over state and national scandals are reasons for this problem.

by Matt Brix on Thu Jun 15, 2006 at 03:38:54 PM EST


Catch-22

It's ironic that disaffected citizens don't vote, thereby giving up their chance to elect more appealing officials.

One way to improve their outlook, I suppose, and to make them feel in control of elections again, is to institute reforms such as voter-owned elections, more competitive districts, and verifiable paper ballots.

by Kirstin Ellison on Thu Jun 15, 2006 at 03:48:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Ethics, too

Kirsten, I agree with you. Too many voters, me included, often feel helpless that their vote does not make a difference. I believe that competitive elections are essential because citizens are more likely to believe that their vote counts. Moreover, citizens also can feel disaffected when politicians behave unethically. Confidence in elected officials must be retored.

by Matt Caruso on Thu Jun 15, 2006 at 07:49:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account just by filling out the form below. It's quick and free.


contact us | volunteer/intern programs | employment opportunities | site map | privacy policy