The presidential election, arguably
the single most important election in American politics and by far the most
wildly publicized, has averaged a voter turnout of just under 54% of the voting
age population in the last 20 years. This lack of participation is consistent with
Mancur Olson’s The Logic of Collective
Action. In fact, given the incredibly miniscule value of a single vote
compared to the amount of time and effort an individual must spend to place his
vote, I would go so far to say that percentage of participants is actually much higher than Olson’s Logic would predict. Where does this increase
of voter turnout come from? What selective incentives are being applied to
increase voter turnout beyond what The
Logic would predict?
Some influence comes from numerous ads published
by various sources in the weeks and months leading up to the election, which
attempt to sway their viewers into action by appealing to their sense of
patriotism and civic duty. However, I would venture that the majority of the
incentives are generated through the actions
of local volunteers who actively seek to spread information about their candidate
and increase voter turnout on election day. This “ground game” is often the
deciding factor in borderline states where the candidates are roughly equal in
the polls. Since only about half of the polled populace will turn out for the
vote, the question becomes not which way the general populace is leaning, but
which party can actually motivate the greater number of their supporters to
actually go out and vote.
It appears that this ground game is
the result of political parties realizing the same obstacles on voter
participation that are outlined in Olson’s Logic.
By organizing groups of volunteers and sending them out to organize things like
free carpools to the voting stations, each party is attempting to reduce the opportunity
cost for those who will vote for their candidate, leading to a greater showing
in the general election.
No comments:
Post a Comment