APATHY, INCONVENIENCE, AND THE AMERICAN VOTER

The notion of democracy is a sacred one. In its most idealistic sense it is an inclusive idea; a blueprint for a society which will aptly pool the collective will of the citizenry, thereby realizing the dream of a government by and for the people. The most basic tool employed in a democratic state is the election. Voting is the essential proof of democracy, for it is the vote that endows the people with the power to influence the policies and laws which rule the land. The United States of America has been a symbol of democracy since its inception, championing the will of the people above all else. However, an examination behind the fatade of democracy in the United States reveals a troubling statistic: the U.S. is 20th out of 21 in voter turnout among the established democracies of the world(Grofman, 1999).

American citizens have found reasons to sidestep the cornerstone of the democratic process. Political scientists and pollsters have sought to unearth specifics - any explanation for the tide of apathy that has brought Americans to the polls in ever diminishing numbers in recent decades. And the explanations are numerous: a laborious voter registration process, lengthy ballots, negative campaigning among candidates, a disassociation from the two main political parties, and a lack of trust for the government in general have all been pinpointed as contributors to the voter apathy that grips the masses (Grofman, 1999; Pro

. . .
ses and pitfalls of each plan. Ultimately, the new developments in voting theory seek to streamline the voting process, allowing it to mirror the fast pace and busy life of the electorate. The voting process therefore intends to become quicker, easier, and simpler. The most conservative of these plans involve extending the voting schedule and altering the voting booth locations. Weekend voting and extending the voting period, for example, are thought of as ways to bring more voters to the polls. Also, the prospect of moving polling places to shopping centers and other high traffic areas have been considered (Grofman, 1999). This way, voters would be able to combine a trip to the polls with other activities. These ideas are safe, and would certainly not overhaul our voting system. On the positive side, measures like these offer convenience to the voting public and are relatively inexpensive to implement. On the down side, they have been criticized by more radical reformers as being too benign; they would not provide voters with the kind of convenience they require (Smith, 1994). True reformers of the voting process advocate more extreme measures. As is reported in Burck Smith's "Opportunities with New Methods of Voti
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Vote Smart, According Smith's, Turnout Comparisons, Phil Keisling, Methods Voting, United America, Vote Mail, INCONVENIENCE VOTING, DemocracyRetrieved April, Wide Web, voter turnout, low voter, voting process, low voter turnout, 2000 world, 2000 world wide, world wide web, world wide, wide web, voting democracyretrieved april, democracyretrieved april, wide web wwwigcorg, web wwwigcorg, voting democracyretrieved, grofman 1999,
Approximate Word count = 2561
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page)