Why do people vote as they do? Why do so many not vote?

Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Why do people vote as they do? Why do so many not vote?
Voting is a constitutional right, and arguably the most significant opportunity offered to citizens. However, this changes from one government to the other. In America, the voting right was passed into law in 1965 after the House of Representatives acceded to the bill by the majority votes. Previously, people, especially the blacks, were being segregated by race, gender, and literacy level. They were forced to do literacy tests that were far too difficult for them. In other parts of the Southern States, they were required to read the entire Constitution and recite it while explaining the most complex parts. The formation of the voting law banned the use of the literacy tests and provided the federal supervision in regions where more than fifty percent of the non-white had not registered as voters. To date, anyone is eligible to vote as long as they are registered as electors. Those who vote have different perspectives and do not necessarily follow each other. No one is restricted to associate themselves with a particular political party, religion or hold meetings to deliberate on the way to vote. This paper seeks to address why people vote the way they do and why many still opt not to vote.
Voting right is contained in the historic civil laws that directed that citizens are not denied the right on account of color and race. Since the civil war when the 15th amendment was consented, disallowing the male citizens the right to vote, the law has been revisited far many times to date.

This has led to the modification of various clauses in the constitution in a bid to liberate people especially the blacks and abolish segregation of the inferior groups (Felchner 15-20). Ethnicity was evident in the south where the proportion of the black was higher than the whites. Their political power was then regarded as a threat to the political status quo. America had to challenge the voting restrictions and improve the voter turnout. However, people’s voting methods and beliefs are influenced by many factors including the socioeconomic status, ethnic group, and the party one is affiliated to as well as the environmental surroundings. People react differently to varying political associations as indicated by Edlin, Gelman, and Kaplan and hence, either as a group or individuals, rationality always prevails (10). Voting is thus not only a constitutional right but also a major factor in the country’s economic growth and political stability.
Many are times when people with varying and inconsistent views deliberate over the leadership matters. It is not only limited to politics but also flows into business, social organizations and religious sectors. Voting is the easiest way to determine the winners when multiple options appear who in most cases scoops the majority support. Nonetheless, the first question that we must answer before assessing why and how people vote is if voting matters. For so long, the voting processes used have always indicated visible flaws. Whether in minor office positions of in political posts, campaigns and elections are tumultuous. However, the voting process does not have to be wild. Voting is imperative for any position. It is the most democratic way for people to be involved in choosing whomever they wish to lead them. By exercising the right to vote, people choose who they find fit as regards management, organization, and positive leadership. However, the efficient voting system should not stress on party affiliations, group choice or coercion. The rewards of voting are not limited to honesty, peace, and straight governance when correctly applied.
Someone’s cultural background dictates how they vote. According to the 2010 general election in the US, about 69% of the ethnic minority voters (the blacks and white moderate) voted for the Democrat leader as opposed to 16% who voted for the conservative. This was because the Democratic Party was led by a black person with whom they believe in sharing a common ethnicity. According to Tisch, the support for Obama differed with race and gender (3). Up to 98% of the black women voted for Obama while only 48% white females voted for him. As indicated in the fact sheet that summarizes the findings of how people voted, the majority supporters of Obama were the blacks (male and female) and Hispanics.

Figure 1: Tisch, Jonathan. Youth Vote Choice for the 2012 Presidential Election by Race and Gender. Digital image. The Center For Information & Research On Civic Learning And Engagement. Lincoln Filence Hall Medford, 14 Nov. 2014. Web. 24 Nov. 2016.
Although the blacks primarily voted by color, they still felt that the president could address the challenges they had been facing such as desegregation. Also, they felt more optimistic about the economic situation holding on the notion that it was regaining from the previous decline.
Secondly, people vote by performance scale of the aspirants and their supposedly ability to deliver personal likings. Every voter has particular interests they would want to be addressed. This could be a development, policy or just a social matter that needs to be addressed for self and the community as a whole. This is an issue of conformity of vision between the aspirant and the voter. Referring to the case of 2010 US elections, there was a particular cutline between Obama and Romney. Although Obama had served five years, some citizens felt he was fit for a second term while others opposed his ruling. From the statistical analysis, Young White males were confident about some policies such as the legalization of abortion. This favored them as they would not be forced into early parenting, an issue that had seen many drop out of school previously. Others supported same-sex marriages. The two saw about 66% of the young people vote for Obama and not Romney who was against the policies. Some of the young males were torn in between supporting for the deportation of undocumented immigrants or allowing them to apply for legal status. Referring to the fact that Obama himself is black, 46% of the young voters representing those who supported deportation voted against him.

Figure 1. Tisch, Jonathan. Young People’s View on Governor Romney’s Economic Policy. Digital image. The Center For Information & Research On Civic Learning And Engagement. Lincoln Filence Hall Medford, 14 Nov. 2014. Web. 24 Nov. 2016.
The voters also consider the level of economic growth before supporting a candidate. This was a point of concern for the adults who have families and run businesses in the 2010 elections. Assessing the economic stability over the Obama’s tenure, the budget increase, and general living standards led to 54% of the white men supporting Romney. This indicates that apart from the ethnic origin, voters also assess the aspirants on their policies and performance. According to Achen and Bartels 10 % of citizens vote upon a careful analysis of the candidate’s plan (5). It is the most appropriate way to bring the change one wants. Politically, it is usually impossible as many people do not bother to dig into the history of the aspirant and especially regarding their performance. In the local and business management sector, voting is done on the basis of performance and qualities. Not many will go for a manager who does not realize the organization’s vision. According to reports, citizens hold the notion that they can control the government by voting. This has been a culture passed from one generation to the other indicating that voting is a product of inherited partisan loyalties. With time, the citizens can construct ideologies and policy preferences that rationalize the choices although the issues are seldom fundamental.
The third determinant of how people vote is political identification. In the US three parties are highly popularized. These are the Democrat, Republican, and the Independent parties. According to Cox people mostly affiliates themselves with a party because it shares their inclinations (760). However, there are those parties that are grounded on some geographical localities. This happens in particular states where parties are formed by aspirants particularly when multiparty movement is allowed. As a result, parties are either ethnic or tribal. On the other hand, people adopt some individuals due to coercion or conformity to what has always been common. This occurs in a case where parents were affiliates of a given movement. As a result, the children get to adopt the same.
There is a small percentage of citizens who vote regarding the candidate’s perception and ethicality. This may happen in a situation where the church is against some of the policies the aspirant fights for. An example is the abortion policy that was objected by some denominations like the Catholic churches. As a result, the strong followers of the religion may opt not to vote for the aspirant who supports presumably adverse policies. Ethicality is also determined by the race. Some tribes are known to be ethically immoral, and people will just drop the aspirant by the first name. Also, a small percentage will vote for the first listed candidate. This happens when the voter has not decided which candidate to support. In countries like Florida, the party that won the governorship is allowed to list their candidates first in the polling papers. This could go a long way to help them win the election by getting the votes from those who voted hesitantly.
The reason why many people vote the way they is a contentious issue. Any voter will assess the reward they would gain from voting, the probability of a preferred candidate winning and the benefit they would get from that. Further, it is determined by an individual perception regarding election especially if their input could change anything. There are those who evaluate the cost of voting in terms of money, time and other resources. “The way an individual vote is a function of their motivation, their ability to vote, and the complexity of the voting process” (Wheeler 3). Wheeler further argues that motivation can arise from the strong preference for a given candidate or the mere notion of being a responsible citizen. One’s capacity to vote refers to their ability to make an informed decision.
The primary determinants why some people opt not to vote are age, family status and education. According to a statistical report in Canada after the May 2011 elections, the voter’s turnout was half the expected for the people aged between 18-24 years (Blais 7). It was slightly higher for those between 25-34 years while those above 35 recorded a percentage just below the expected average. This indicates that older people embrace voting as a personal right and a necessary activity. Up to 82% of the people aged between 45 to 54 years turned up for the exercise. However, the percentage drops with age. Health could be the primary reason for elderly not to vote. Many of them are sick of age-related ailments like arthritis, high blood pressure, and diabetes. These cause partial disability that bars them from either reaching the polling station or make them unable decide (LaRochelle-Côté and Uppal (3). One’s mobility, energy level, and general physical health deteriorate with age. As a result, they are unable to stand the long waiting hours in polling lines. Nevertheless, older voter manifest higher political interest than the middle-aged people.
There is a close link between the voting rate and level of education. According to the American history, the voting turnout among the graduates is 78% compared to 60% for those with high school and college level education (ushistory.org 1-3). The percentage reduces by about 19% for those who are uneducated. The difference could be brought about by the individual understanding of democracy and the need for a change that could suit their economic standards. The higher the level of education, the more people are informed and hence can make clearer decisions. Education level also affects the voting turn out in that many graduates have been employed away from their home districts. At times, they may be employed in places that required them to move up and down. This makes them unsettled to vote. Some other occupations like health care practitioners and military do not give people free time to vote. Further, administrators and managers have a low turnout compared to other professionals in the same economic, social class. This could be related to their ever busy schedules and lack of interest in political matters.
The family status also provides a potential factor regarding the way people vote. Family status determines the locality a family lives in and hence the political wave. Many young couples who are in the early stages of parenthood refer to busy schedules as the reason for not voting. Essentially, only less than 40% of single parents turn up for voting especially if they had children under the age of five. Compared to couples in similar standards, single mothers are not as flexible. They also have few people to deliberate with on who are the best candidate or not. On the other hand, only a small percentage of the poor people vote. As opposed to the wealthier individuals who have more time to analyze politicians and make decisions, the less successful use much of their time striving to earn a living. As a result, they have little or no time to deliberate or turnout for voting.
The last factor is the immigration status. Eligible immigrants do not embrace voting as an important exercise. According to Stockemer, there are many reasons associated to this such as lack of democratic tradition, distrust in the institutions and differences in political beliefs (7-8). Women originating from the Western countries will not vote as they still hold their cultures. In the Islamic countries, women are rarely allowed to engage in politics. As such they are denied the right to vote. The cost of registering as a voter is one of the most significant reasons why many Americans fail to vote. According to Kelly, Ayres and Brown, the registration requirements impose substantial bars to turn out. The citizen must follow certain rules regarding when and how to register, and when in situations where one moves from one location to another. As a result, the voter is required expend effort to gain knowledge as well as comply with the stipulated regulations.
Other social and psychological factors also come into play when determining a person’s ability to vote. The first is neighborhood characteristics. Living in higher status localities encourages participation in politics. This is because there is a higher probability of being informed by the neighbors about each aspirant’s characteristics and their visions. With time one is influenced to participate in the voting process. However, lowly educated people living among the high educated ones will most likely not vote. They feel unqualified to influence or have different preferences. At the same time, neighborhood determines party affiliations (Gimpel, Dyck and Shaw 350). Where there are unevenly balanced parties memberships, those in the less dominant party may find it uneasy to participate in elections. This is a bid to safeguard their relationships within the locality.
It is evident that one will vote if the rewards from voting outweigh the time, resources, and costs information access the voter has to incur. An individual’s choice to vote or not is bound to their motivation, the surrounding situations, ability to vote and the intricacy of the entire process. It is should, however, be understood that voting is exercising their constitutional rights. At the same time, it helps them make the changes they wish politically, socially and economically. It is the responsibility of the electoral commission to ensure that everyone, including the disabled and aged, is embraced and given a chance to vote by making the process accommodating. The voting turnout can be increased if the organizations concentrate on educating the voters, motivating them through face-to-face talks and making the process easier.
Works Cited
Achen, Christopher H and Larry M Bartels. Democracy For Realists. 1st ed. Print.
Blais, André. Canadian Election Survey, 2000. 1st ed. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2004. Print.
Cox, Michaelene. “When Trust Matters: Explaining Differences In Voter Turnout.” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 41.4 (2003): 760-765.
Edlin, Aaron S, Andrew Gelman, and Noah Kaplan. Voting As A Rational Choice. 1st ed. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2007. Print.
Felchner, Morgan E. Voting In America. 1st ed. Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2008.
Gimpel, James G., Joshua J. Dyck, and Daron R. Shaw. “Registrants, Voters, And Turnout Variability Across Neighborhoods”. Political Behavior 26.4 (2004): 348-354.
Kelley, Stanley, Richard E. Ayres, and William G. Bowen. “Registration And Voting: Putting First Things First”. Am Polit Sci Rev 61.02 (1967): 360-363.
LaRochelle-Côté, Sébastien and Sharanjit Uppal. “Factors Associated With Voting”. Statcan.gc.ca. N.p., 2016. Web. 24 Nov. 2016.
Stockemer, Daniel. “What Affects Voter Turnout? A Review Article/Meta-Analysis Of Aggregate Research”. Gov. & oppos. (2016): 7-10.
Tisch, Jonathan. “The Center For Information & Research On Civic Learning And Engagement”. Circle Fact Sheet. N.p., 2016. Web. 24 Nov. 2016.
ushistory.org,. “What Factors Shape Political Attitudes?”. American Government Online Textbook. N.p., 2010. Web. 25 Nov. 2016.
Wheeler, Brian. “The Strange Truth About How And Why We Vote – BBC News”. BBC News. N.p., 2016. Web. 24 Nov. 2016.