Skip to main content

"Election season has come and gone", well maybe not so much.  It is always election season with some of us.  I confess to being an election junkie.  I have checked David Wasserman's tally every day since Veteran's Day and I checked on the status of every undecided House race until the last one was decided.  While the tabulations are not complete, the general picture is there--Obama won comfortably.  Against pretty strong odds, Democrats gained in the Senate and facing headwinds created by gerrymandering, Democrats also gained in the House, but not nearly enough to overcome the blowout loss of 2010.

Much time and ink has been spent exploring the how and why of the election of 2012, and I think there is linkage between several issues that progressives need to address in order to make our election system fairer and more representative going forward.  Much more after the break.  

There are several factors in why elections have swung so wildly in the past four years.  Obama won big in 2008, and had a solidly Democratic Congress, then Republicans had an historic victory in 2010, getting a huge majority in the House, paring down the Democratic advantage in the Senate, and claiming many statehouses and state legislatures along the way.  Now, Obama wins easily, Democrats make gains at all levels, but not back to pre-2010 levels.  What's the deal?

My view is that the swings are all about who votes.  First of all, it should be noted that participation is never high enough.  National turnout never reaches even 65% in a presidential election year and has been stuck in the 30s in off-years since 1970.  With the exception of Clinton's second term win, it is clear that higher turnouts benefit Democrats.  Beyond that, I would state that higher turnouts benefit the country.  The more people that participate, the more that make an investment in deciding what the government should do.  

As a practical matter, if turnout were raised 5-10%, Democrats would be solid favorites in all states Obama won plus a few that he didn't compete in--Georgia, North Carolina, Indiana and Missouri.  I submit that since Reagan at least, no Republican has truly been a majority choice of all eligible voters.  It is both good government and good politics for Democrats to somehow get turnout up.  How to do this?  Follow the lead of states with high turnout--make registration fast and easy or best, allow same-day registration.  Have polls open sufficient hours on election day to avoid long lines and delays or better, permit early voting.  Finally, have a vital two-party system for the state.  If people are convinced that their vote matters, they are far more likely to vote.  

Voter turnout is down this year, only a few million, out of about 130 million votes, but allowing about a 1% per year increase in eligible voters, that means turnout was down more like 5%, not a good number.  Why?  I think many see politics as a game of the "haves", more think that their vote doesn't matter, and many more have other things to occupy their lives.  These factors, plus a coordinated effort by conservatives to suppress the vote have kept turnout relatively low in the modern era.  Much more to say about this in Part II of my diary to be published later this week.        

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site