Trust in our election process — and vote! In a tight election, voter turnout will likely decide many races
The first presidential election that caught my attention was in 1960, when I was a young boy and John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon were locked in a very close race that came down to a few thousand votes in Illinois and Texas.
My parents were strong Kennedy supporters, and we lived in a reliably Republican town. (Yes, this drama occurred 64 years ago.) Our classroom teacher took us down to the school gymnasium, where there was a long line of voters waiting for the chance to cast their ballots. My parents happened to be in that line, and I was proud to see them taking part in the democratic process.
While there is considerable pressure these days to cast ballots early, that experience from long ago may play a role in my stubborn determination to go to the polls on Election Day (yes, Tuesday, Nov. 5) and stand in line at my precinct and wait my turn to vote. There is an understandable desire of party activists to get as many votes cast early as possible, so they are “in the bank.”
In recent elections, Donald Trump and his supporters stubbornly resisted early voting, and fueled conspiracy theories about ballot stuffing and votes from non-citizens as part of their narrative to vote on Election Day. At the same time, Democrats jumped on the early-vote bandwagon and supported legislation that allowed absentee voting without a specific excuse. Indeed, some states have done away with polling places and have moved virtually the entire election process to vote by mail.
This year, the Trump forces are more agreeable to early voting, perhaps sensing that putting all of their eggs in the Election Day basket is bad strategy. Here in Rapid City, Rep. Steve Duffy, a Democrat-turned-Republican who is running an expensive campaign for re-election, has billboards which urge his supporters to “vote today.”
For some people, it may be comforting to go vote early, fulfill one’s civic duty, and then tune out the rest of the campaign. Since this year’s election is particularly nasty and divisive, that rationale is understandably tempting. But I’m a political junkie, always sorting through newspapers, emails, junk mail, commercials and other sources which might conceivably change my vote in a down-ballot race or on an obscure ballot issue.
In 2018, I actually changed my mind about which candidate to support for state auditor based on a newspaper ad which ran on Sunday, just two days before the election. Hey, keep your eyes and ears open and you might learn something.
For someone who is serving in the military, attending college or stuck in the hospital, voting by mail is clearly necessary. On the other hand, I have instinctively reacted against the notion of driving by a public building and sticking my completed ballot in a drop box. I have had the paranoid thought that someone might toss an incendiary device into that drop box, allowing completed ballots to go up in flames.
Just the other day, my paranoid fantasy became a reality in Portland, Ore., and nearby Vancouver, Washington, as hundreds of ballots were damaged and destroyed. Interestingly enough, with control of the U.S. House hanging by a thread, the Vancouver area has an extremely competitive House race between Democratic incumbent Marie Gluesenkamp Perez and her Republican challenger Joe Kent. A recent poll showed their race tied, so the arsonist may have succeeded in changing the outcome.
If I am still living and breathing on Election Day, I will not forget to cast my ballot. I will deposit it into a ballot box that is secure and is being closely watched. My preferences will be counted electronically, which is probably for the best. Having been involved many years ago in counting ballots by hand, a process that lasted most of the night after a long day at the polls, I appreciate the fact that a machine can come up with a more accurate count than exhausted poll workers. Contrary to the insinuations of the Trump forces, the people who handle the counting of ballots are generally honest, and in any event, there are checks and balances, with both parties overseeing the process.
The close elections this year, for president, Congress and on ballot questions and a few legislative races here in South Dakota, are more likely to be determined by voter turnout than by convincing the small number of undecided voters. If one side does a better job of turning out first-time voters and people who are apathetic or discouraged, that side has a good chance to win.
Understandably, both sides want to get most of their votes “in the bank” early. Of course, all votes count the same, whether cast weeks early or just before the polls close. Heaven forbid that voters who have children of their own be given more weight than “childless cat ladies.”
One person, one vote is deeply ingrained in our democracy.
Jay Davis is a retired Rapid City lawyer and a frequent contributor to The South Dakota Standard.
Photo: public domain image of the 2016 presidential election by county, as posted on wikimedia commons (Click on the link for a detailed explanation of the different shades of coloration.)
