by Darien Watkins

Created on: October 08, 2008

When making decisions in everyday life, most of us rank the short term ahead of the long term, and number one before number two. People will only act on situations that they individually 'feel' are directly connected to their lives. Why don't some people vote? It may be because voters do not feel that whomever they vote for will directly benefit them, especially in a country of this size and prosperity.

First lets touch on why size does matter, in the case of democratic nations. Most of us have been in a classroom, family, or social situation where a vote has taken place, whether it be a testing date, dinner choice, or late night hangout. Usually these votes involve only a handful of people, with the larger classroom setting tredding on the thin ice of our cares. With just a handful of people, the outcome of the vote affects the individual much more directly. If the vote goes your way, the test date could be moved back giving you more time to study, or your favorite pizza could be ordered fullfilling your day long craving, or a bar could win out where a certain interest of yours may happen to frequent. Now lets say the vote involves 300 million people, with a potential of 300 million unique problems, many of which may not be addressed by any of the choices, directly. The odds of you getting the test date you want, the different toppings, or the late night spot you want stack heavily against you.

Second, the United States has been, and still is the most prosperous nation on the planet. Though there are still alarming poverty rates across the country, most of us get by fairly comfortably, relative to the rest of the world. People have felt that whomever is voted into office, they will still be able to keep the status quo of their lives. The rich could care less about affordable healthcare and the poor could not directly relate to high salary income tax cuts. If this was a country in the midst of civil war, which we have been, people would feel their votes to have much more importance, as their lives would not be so peachy. Alot of times we are voting for candidates who are either for national park reservation or against it. If thiis were a democratic country in say central africa, or the middle east, we could very well be voting for a candidate who is for building a national economy or going to war for resources. The fact they we are voting for people, lies the most important aspect of the problem that I see.

This presidential election season has seen record turnouts by voters, mostly due to the emergence of issues that apply directly to the people, and to the country, across all walks of life. The economy and the Iraq war affect the upper class, middle class, and the lower class. Now that the issues resonate alot more with the general public, there is still a much more fundamental reason why people do not vote. Imagine if you would have to elect a particular person to decide whether or not pizza is ordered. How would you trust that person to do so once elected? I believe that if the issues were on the ballout instead of people, in other words if the middle man was removed between you and your pizza, we would not be having this converstion.

Learn more about this author, Darien Watkins.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.