THERE'S an old, bad joke abouttwo economists who run intoeach other at a voting booth. Both are embarrassed to be seen there and agree not to tell anyone. They're embarrassed because economists know better than to vote: The costs clearly outweigh the benefits.
It seems most Americans think like economists. In the 2006 elections, only 43.6 percent of the voting-age population voted. Just last week we saw similarly low voter turnout at the University: A mere 36 percent of undergraduates voted. And that number drops to just 28 percent if I include graduate students. Why don't Americans vote?
In the United States, we have good excuses: Voting entails exceptionally high opportunity costs. To be an informed voter I have to search the web for candidates' policy positions, watch them on TV for debating skills, and read newspapers to find out about their past experience (or lack thereof). I then have to fill out a bunch of paperwork to register to vote and, finally, actually drive to a polling station to vote. All of this takes valuable time I could have spent with friends and family, at work, or out partying.
According to the economic framework, I need to receive massive returns from voting to make all this preparation worthwhile. But the odds that my vote affects the outcome of the election are slim to none. So rather than wonder why people don't vote, it's better to ask why anyone actually votes. The short answer is that in the United States, we have a vibrant civil society. But at the University, this is sorely lacking. Although low voter turnout makes sense in national elections, at the University, few of the same conditions apply. All students are automatically registered and we can vote online with a click with a button. Moreover, everyone knows what the University Judiciary Comittee and the Honor Committee do, so it's not costly at all to be a fairly informed voter. But a truly informed voter still has to learn the candidates' positions.
That's why we've invented voting for dummies. In U.S. elections we call them political parties. At the University, we call them endorsements. Want to be an informed voter without actually doing any work? Just vote how the University Democrats tell you to. If you like your politics a bit more conservative, listen to the College Republicans. Even the Greek community and Minority Rights Coalition endorse candidates. The costs to voters have never been lower.
Yet University students still don't vote. This is especially troubling because, unlike in national elections, our votes actually do matter: Candidates' margin of victory is never more than a few hundred votes, if that. The simple explanation is that the University lacks a civil society.
Every year I pointlessly vote absentee in New York. Why? Because it's my civic duty as an American. Aristotle argued that citizenship consists not of political rights, but of political duties. Thomas Jefferson founded this University in order to inculcate young Virginians with civic virtue. Sadly, it seems to be doing the opposite.
This becomes clear in the disaggregated voting data. If the University instilled a sense of political engagement, then students who have been here longer would be more likely to vote. Instead, whereas 41 percent of first-year students voted, only 25 percent of fourth years voted. Since upperclassmen will leave sooner, they have less of a personal stake in election outcomes. Thus they're thinking as the economist does, but they're not thinking of the University community.
That is the fundamental failure that last week's election demonstrates. Rousseau wrote of the integral nature of people's rootedness to their culture. The minority of Americans who actually vote do so because they feel that it's part of American-ness. But there is no University-ness. Sure we come together as a community to cheer on the football and basketball teams, but we're fundamentally individuals, not a community.
The real shame is that we lose due to our own failure of virtue. This disengagement has resulted in years of few (if any) accomplishments by Student Council. The Honor Committee is badly in need of reform, but nothing has really changed in decades. UJC requires diligent, competent management, yet University students voted in some of the least experienced candidates last week. Desperate e-mails and T-shirts by the University Board of Elections cannot possibly bridge this gap. The University needs a cultural reawakening and a return to its founding principles if student self-governance is to last. So please, next year, go out and vote.
Josh Levy's column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at jlevy@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | YesterdayLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 4 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
