Civic Participation

In order to make a well informed decision about which candidate to choose there are certain expectations citizens have. Citizens are expected to, “be interested and to participate in political affairs… to be well informed…to cast his vote on the basis of principle…and to exercise rational judgment” (Democratic Practice and Democratic Theory, Woll, 207-208). Nevertheless, history proves to show that rarely citizens meet these expectations. Instead they go with the flow, so to speak, they follow past habits, listen to others who seem to know what they are talking about, and watch the news in order to make up their minds about which candidate to vote for. But most citizens’ minds are made up even before they know who is running, they vote for their parties candidate. So then what is the point? The point is to try and increase citizens’ interest in their democracy through voting.

In Document 35 V.O. Key, Jr. states that an election is “a formal act of collective decision that occurs in a stream of connected antecedent and subsequent behavior” (A Theory of Critical Elections, Woll, 200). A “critical election” causes a lasting “realignment” of the electorate also it portrays the changes in political attitudes. The “critical election” according to V.O. Key, Jr. was “developed to cover a type of election in which there occurs a sharp and durable electorate realignment between parties” (A Theory of Critical Elections, Woll, 204). In order to better understand the elections V.O. Key. Jr. suggests, “the study of electoral behavior with the analysis of political systems” (A Theory of Critical Elections, Woll, 205).

“Nearly half of the eligible electorate fails to go to the polls’ in midterm congressional elections, only about one-third of the electorate show up, and in many local elections, turnouts of less then 10 percent of eligible voters are not uncommon” (American Democracy in Peril, Hudson, 143). Over the last century America has fought tirelessly to obtain voting rights for women and African American citizens, so why is voter turnout so low in American? According to Document 36 it is because, “for the bulk of the American people the voting decision is not followed by any direct, immediate, visible personal consequences (Democratic Practice and Democratic Theory, Woll, 207). Citizens may be more concerned with what to make for dinner than who to vote for because it has an immediate impact on their life. For many citizens if their candidate loses, “it doesn’t really matter.”

While it is true that some citizens feel that voting does not affect their lives others such as William Hudson feel, “that voting is a duty of citizenship in a democratic society. My vote symbolizes my participation in a crucial process” (American Democracy in Peril, Hudson, 151). Hudson also contradicts what is said in Document 36 by saying that, “many people will weigh the costs of voting against its benefits and decide to go to the polls” (American Democracy in Peril, Hudson, 151-152). Hudson also addresses a key factor in civic participation “that political participation trained people in the necessary values of democracy” (American Democracy in Peril, Hudson, 145). None of the Woll documents discuss this specific theory that through voting citizens are learning values specific to democracy. By having the citizens share the responsibility in choosing a political candidate it allows for Americas democracy to flourish.

Also what is not addressed in the Woll documents is the differences between “Red” and “Blue” America. In the packet Brooks evaluates the differences between the two. Many political theories state that American is becoming a more politically divided nation, the Republicans versus the Democrats. But according to Brooks, “We are not a divided nation. We are a cafeteria nation,” (One Nation, Slightly Divisible, Brooks, 216). Brooks believes that “we form cliques” and then from those cliques we either create “sub cliques” or migrate to another clique with similar interests.

Document 36 explains that the expectations placed on citizens to produce a successful democracy are not fulfilled by the average citizen. Even though the individual voter falls short of these expectations the “system of democracy” does not. This paradox is caused by the core conjecture that the electorate is “homogeneous” in political thinking, when in fact; the electorate is “heterogeneous”. “The need for heterogeneity arises from the contradictory functions we expect out voting system to serve” (Democratic Practices and Democratic Theory, Woll, 210). America cannot be a nation where citizens are expected to have homogeneous views, enforcing that degrades Americans democracy.

Citizens are expected to make decisions based on the information presented to them but “emotional feeling” affects the decision that many voters will make. Voters are expected to vote based on their own interests and ideas but the truth of the matter is that many citizens “vote the way trusted people around him are voting” (Democratic Practice and Democratic Theory, Woll, 208). As voters we are also expected to have our own opinion but for the greater good of the community. It seems that an electorate is required have a “distribution of qualities along important dimensions” (Democratic Practice and Democratic Theory, Woll, 210).

A major concern in politics is the publics low interest but “low interest provides maneuvering room for political shifts necessary for a complex society” (Democratic Practice and Democratic Theory, Woll, 210). Those who know more are less likely to change than those citizens who have less interest.

Does voting seem to be an individual act? Well, yes on the surface a citizen chooses a candidate whose beliefs they support and they vote for that person. But as Document 36 points out deciding on who to vote for is not an individual act at all it involves many people. “The individual casts his own personal ballot… that is perhaps the most individualized action he takes in an election” (Democratic Practice and Democratic Theory, Woll, 212).
In Document 37 V.O. Key, Jr. argues against the notion that voters are incompetent he feels that voters are not a foolish as they have been made out to be by politicians. By winning a candidates assume that they know all the reasons for their win when in face no one can fully understand why voters vote they way they do. Assuming that you know the reasons voters vote is “repugnant” according to V.O. Key, Jr. He feels that no one can truly know all the reasons for voting but that through political surveys it has allowed “them to make fairly trustworthy estimates on the characteristics and behaviors of large human populations” (The Responsible Electorate, Woll, 214). Just because a candidate wins does not mean that he is liked by the majority of the population, look at George W. Bush he did not with the popular vote Al Gore won that but he still became President.

The older view about electorates regarded, “the voter as an erratic and irrational fellow susceptible to manipulation by skilled humbugs” (The Responsible Electorate, Woll, 215). By understanding specific information about the voter according to Document 37 one can predict who one will vote for base on certain characteristics. The voter behavior theory is important because it “effects, both potentially and in reality, on candidates and other political leaders” (The Responsible Electorate, Woll, 216).

As interests in civic participation continue to decrease what does this mean for America’s democracy? Will America’s fate be decided by the few who vote or will voting cease to exist? These questions seem absurd but if nothing is done to boost voting interests it could become a reality.

-Harbhajan