The Missing Voters in the 2016 Primary Election

In the primary election held on the first Tuesday of August, voter turnout was shockingly low.  2016 has been one of the most politically turbulent years in the last half-century, with both the Democratic and Republican Parties roiled by unexpected challengers to the "obvious" candidate. In the case of the Republican Party, of course, the erratic and unpredictable Donald Trump is the nominee, and the party finds itself torn by disagreements between those who are electrified by his candidacy, and those whose motto is "Never Trump."  The GOP may literally be facing a schism that could permanently alter the future of the party.  As of this writing, the party's leadership is in a dither and leaders are scrambling to project a sense of unity in the hope of salvaging the election in November.

That level of upheaval would, one might assume, lead voters to the polls in droves, anxious to shape the outcome of the elections.  But the primary in Missouri, where I live, brought out only 24.8% of registered voters.  About 1 million folks turned out to vote in this state of 6 million.  Perhaps equally troubling, about 30% of those who are eligible are not even registered to vote.  Research from the Pew Foundation indicates that those who are most likely to vote are older, married, white college graduates who own their homes.  So those who vote, in other words, are relatively more well off than those who don't.  There is a 36% voting disparity between those in the highest income quintile and those in the lowest.

So, how does this impact our political process?  Decisions made by elected officials tend to reflect the class interests of those who elected them.  Low income voters in the US do not fare well when policies are made because they have little impact on electoral outcomes. Progressive social policies that might improve the income, health, and well-being of the poorest voters are unlikely to be enacted, and campaign financing laws that benefit the privileged are even more likely to be passed.  Countries where the income disparity in voting is high are far less likely to redistribute revenue in a way that reduces poverty or inequality.  A vicious cycle ensues in which political alienation results in policies that promote greater income inequality, which in turn leads to greater alienation from the political process.  As Chelsea McKevitt of Demos noted in 2015 "Our legislatures are a reflection of our voters, but our voters are not a reflection of the electorate." 

To reverse the tide of economic inequality in the United States, our legislative bodies will need to become more responsive to citizens who inhabit the bottom three income quintiles (roughly $75,000 or less annually per household). This means increasing the voting rates for those lower earning households, but how do we get there?  My posts over the next several weeks will look at policies that increase voter turnout.  Do you have ideas about how to increase voting rates, particularly for those of low to moderate incomes?  I'd be interested in hearing them, particularly if they are offered in the spirit of making the United States a more responsive and egalitarian democracy.

ETS