~ Elections, Campaigns, and Voting ~

1.) Read Bush v. Gore in the text. Do you agree with the majority or the dissenting opinion? Why?

I have to say in this decision, I agree with the dissenting opinion regarding the election recount between Bush and Gore. My reasoning behind this is that there was no December 12th deadline in Florida law. What the Florida Legislature "intended" to do, in my opinion, is not law.If there was no law on the books stating a deadline that the recount ballots should have been completed, then there should have been a deadline. I think we should have expected reasonable timing and that it was completed before the swearing in of a new president, but I think they should have allowed the recount. With 6 million voters, it was reasonable to think there could have been a 537 vote error in the count.... that's less than 1%, which is reasonable.
I think the the legislative branch was wrong for allowing the United States Supreme Court to step in and rule on this case, because the elections are administered under state law, and this should have been back to the courts in the state to decide. Once the power to do something is given to the state, I think it should have been left in their hands to make the final decision.

2.) Is the ability to fund raise too important in elections? In other words, are good candidates prevented from running because they cannot raise the needed funds? Can/should something be done to correct this if it is a problem?

I think that sometimes we do miss out on having additional candidates because of fund raising issues. There are always "front-runners" in every election, in many cases early in the process. A lot of this is due to press and name-dropping, and when people are hearing these "popular" names in the news over and over again, those are the names that stick in our heads when we begin to think about voting. Some candidates, I never hear about until it is time to vote. I think this is where the press has a lot of input and control over elections by getting certain names out there. Candidates gain voter's a lot of time based on popularity more than issues, and this allows for larger donations because everyone wants to be involved and the more popular start to gain momentum and financial support early. Someone whose name is lesser known steps in for financial contributions and doesn't get as much support as the well-known name. They are immediately put behind due to less publicity, which in turns put them behind in supporters and financial contributions. This causes many of them to fall short financially and they end up having to drop out of the race, in many cases before it gets off the ground.
I do believe something should be done about fundraising. I think the Obama campaign spent WAY more than was necessary in getting him elected. I think their should be spending limits put on campaigns in order to give others an equal shot at getting their issues and ideas for the United States out there.
On another note...I wasn't aware that a candidate could get matching funds from the government in order to campaign. Personally, I think this should not be done. I think people who are running for any office should be solely responsible for the cost of their campaign, with their own money and/or money form their financial supporters. To me, it just makes sense that someone isn't a strong enough candidate if they can't raise the funds needed to support and run a campaign. Just a thought I had on the subject.

3.) Why is their such voter apathy? In other words, why is there often such low voter turnout for elections? Is their a way to rectify this problem?

I think the main problem with voter turnout is that too many people don't think their vote makes a difference, and they have lost belief in our political and election systems. I hear it all too often, someone saying they aren't even gonna bother to vote because it doesn't matter anyways. If this is the thinking of one, it is also the thinking of many, and it continues to grow year after year. Now we have half the citizens, who are of voting age, not even bothering to go to the polls. I think another reason is that many are unable to make it to the poles in such a limited time frame, and that in some cases transportation or the ability to get to the polls is an issue.
Yes, I do believe there are ways to rectify the problem. I think the continuation of adding early voting, and additional days opens up the polls for more people to get out and vote. I think these early voting days should include some Saturday voting so that the people who can't afford to take off work can get out and vote. Maybe some polling places need to be kept open even longer and later hours since we are an around the clock working society now, not at every polling place, but certain precincts. I also think that adding different voting methods would help in getting more people involved in voting and the political process. I think cell phone voting, as well as internet voting would make a huge difference even when people feel their vote doesn't count. Just signing on to the internet is much easier for many and I think it would build participation. I also think cell phone voting would add more voters during elections times. If voting is made more convenient to the citizen's I think they would be more inclined to participate, whether they truly felt their vote counted or not because they wouldn't have to go out of the way to vote. It would be easily accessible.


** Blog Comments **
Albert Munoz
Gabrielle Miller
Mackenzie King