More than 63 million people voted in the “American Idol” finale. As the show’s host Ryan Seacrest proudly noted, “That’s more than any president in the history of our country has received.” That may be good news for pop culture, but its bad news for American democracy.
U.S. turnout has historically hovered around 50 percent, and young voters (18- to 24-year-olds) vote in lower numbers than any other age group. In fact, 138 nations register superior voter turnout to the U.S. (according to the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance). Recent history though suggests things may be improving. The last presidential election drew in excess of 60 percent of eligible voters, and turnout among young voters improved significantly. Perhaps “American Idol” can offer some lessons to ensure that trend continues.
“American Idol” airs at a time and on a day when people are likely to be home in front of their TV. Similarly, shouldn’t Election Day be set so that people are most likely to be available to vote? Elections on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November are a relic of our agrarian past. The original intent was to accommodate the Sabbath while allowing people time to get to their polling places and back home for market day, traditionally Wednesday. Today, most people are forced to sneak in a trip to the polls before work or at the end of a hard day, either way contending with long lines. Our Election Day should be a federal holiday so that people can celebrate our democracy in the best way possible — by voting.
Voting for “American Idol” is easy; viewers can either text message or phone in their vote. Countries with spottier — and certainly shorter — democratic pasts than our own are effectively using technology and easy fixes to both improve their electoral processes and broaden their voting base, with biometric verification guarding against voter fraud (Venezuela), electronic voting improving turnout among rural voters (Brazil) and the visually impaired (Australia), and party symbols listed next to candidates to aid illiterate voters (India).
“American Idol” has been such a runaway hit because people don’t just watch it; they get involved with it emotionally. They participate in the process. They audition, they vote, and — most critically — they debate who should win. Democracy is not a spectator sport. People show up on Election Day when they have debated, discussed, and otherwise engaged with the ideas and issues at stake.
But as long as political operators — state and federal — who stand to benefit from the status quo remain the guardians of the polls, improvements in the U.S. election process are unlikely. In 2000, Katherine Harris was simultaneously the Florida secretary of state, the primary arbiter of all issues electoral, and the co-chair of the Bush-Cheney state election committee. In 2004, Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, again co-chair of the Bush-Cheney state reelection committee, tried to throw out mail-in ballots based on the technicality of paper type.
Concern about voter fraud is typically the justification offered by those raising barriers to the ballot box or resisting efforts to ease access. Georgia recently passed a law requiring voters to present a government-issued ID to vote, citing the specter of voter fraud. Political appointees in the Department of Justice approved the law, despite the protests of career attorneys within the department’s Voting Rights Act enforcement division. A federal judge suspended the law, likening it to a poll tax given its likely overwhelming impact on low-income and minority voters, and noted that the state had not seen a proven report of voter impersonation over the last nine years.
Maryland Gov. Robert Ehrlich, citing the danger of voter fraud, is resisting the state legislature’s push to allow early voting and provide electronic voting machines. Linda Lamone, Maryland’s top election official, scoffed at that argument.
“During the last election, with 2 million people voting, only one person tried to vote twice,” she said.
To be certain, fair elections and legitimate outcomes require checks against voter fraud. But the major problem facing our democracy is poor turnout. Concerns about voter fraud ring hollow, and typically mask unease with the impact wider turnout — particularly among the historically disenfranchised — might have on political futures.
A strong set of federal regulations, devised by a genuinely nonpartisan commission of judges and retired political leaders, should impose procedural uniformity and nonpartisan administration of elections on the states. Those regulations should be backed by vigorous enforcement and oversight by career civil servants insulated from political influences.
A vibrant democracy should strive for the most expansive participation possible. We need a broad national campaign aimed at clearing a path to the polls, removing structural hurdles between the right to vote and its vigorous exercise. The challenge facing voters on Election Day should not be how, where or when to vote. It should be deciding who they want representing them, which is hard enough.
Devin Talbott is co-founder and chairman of Generation Engage, a grassroots youth civic engagement effort.
