Being a Responsible Voter is not Easy
It’s becoming increasingly difficult to be a “responsible voter” in today’s America. By “responsible voter,” I mean someone who does his, or her, best to be informed about the major needs and issues that face our society, and then casts votes in a manner that addresses those needs and issues effectively. There are several obstacles which tend to frustrate this effort.
To begin with the American voter has a herculean task in seeking to understand and to grapple with our federal system of governance. James Madison and the other framers of the US Constitution recognized that there would exist within the new nation a multiplicity of interests seeking to influence the course of public affairs. They argued that democracy could best be protected in a large country by a federal system since the various factions would balance off against each other and no one faction would be able to dictate policy.
Consequently, we have authority and power divided among the national government and the individual states. Further divisions occur within each state as local political entities have been created, although with some restrictions on their independence.
In this environment it is sometimes difficult for the individual voter to determine which level of American government is responsible for the needs and issues he, or she, wishes to see addressed. And although Article VI of the US Constitution says in effect that the national laws and treaties “…shall be the supreme Law of the Land…,” there seems to be no limit to the challenges that may arise to any such assertions by federal officers and agencies.
For example, it seem apparent that the 14th Amendment makes clear the “right to vote” is determined by national edict, but individual states still claim the authority to put in place restrictions that appear designed to undermine this right. And although the US Constitution grants to the national government jurisdiction over interstate commerce, in recent years states have become embroiled in vicious economic competition with each other---Boeing moves to South Carolina; Amazon invites states to bid on its second headquarters, etc.
Part of the problem in clarifying the hierarchy of authority or “division” of authority if you will, is the sometime fecklessness of the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS). By custom, not by any constitutional mandate, SCOTUS has been generally recognized as the final arbiter of constitutional disagreements. Therefore, when a SCOTUS majority decides to overturn long held precedents, the orderly process of governance takes a serious blow no matter how justified the action might seem to some citizens.
But besides trying to negotiate the legal questions regarding what level of government has the responsibility for dealing with a given issue, the voter is also faced with the difficult task of sifting through available information related to the needs and issues in question. Historically, in our democratic society we have depended upon Madison’s “multiplicity of interests” to insure that there will always be available a variety of sources of information, and to keep these sources reasonably honest, we have relied upon the constitutional principles of free speech and free press. An unholy alliance between modern technology and unfettered greed is threatening both.
The problem did not begin with Donald Trump. He is only a very egregious symptom.
Back in 1956, Eugene Burdick, a UC-Berkeley political science professor and Rhodes Scholar, published The Ninth Wave , a novel describing how an amoral political consultant employed then cutting-edge innovations in opinion polling and computer analysis to propel a wealthy gubernatorial candidate to victory. The consultant, Michael Freesmith is also a surfer, hence the title which refers to the surfing legend that the “ninth wave” is always larger and more powerful than earlier ones. Freesmith uses information gleaned from opinion polling and computer-aided analysis to reduce the electorate to easily manipulated blocs and then exploits voters through their fears.
A decade later Burdick would expand on this theme in The 480, the title a reference as to how the electorate in that novel’s political campaign was being sliced and diced into 480 different classifications. At the time, 1965, there was speculation that John Kennedy’s 1960 presidential campaign had followed such a script.
The power of today’s computers is far greater than it was 60-70 years ago. Personal data collected via multiple social media platforms, such as Google, Meta, YouTube, Twitter, etc., can be collated, analyzed and actioned in mind-boggling speed. American voters are being classified by habits, fears, hobbies or almost any other trait common to mankind.
And it is not only “Big Tech” that is in the game. Dozens of niche outfits like, PredictWise, TargetSmart and HaystaqDNA generate voter profiles to help political candidates and organizations identify and persuade potential supporters as well as to predict the likelihood of a person actually voting.
Campaign ads are protected generally by the First Amendment, but the use of sophisticated software to “target” voters based on their biases or other personal interests or traits encourages the negativity so prevalent in today’s political commercials, raising questions about the legitimacy of such protection. Most Americans are likely unaware of the extensive datamining industry in the US today. But even if fully informed about the manipulations, what recourse is available?
This situation is a major factor in the exponential leap in the cost of political campaigns. To be a candidate for any major office today requires either great personal wealth or access to far more campaign dollars than any public office pays. Rich billionaires like Peter Thiel, Mike Bloomberg and Jeffrey Yass are ready and willing to underwrite candidates likely to protect their personal interests.
Also exacerbating the problem is the diminishment of local news coverage in the United States. The concentration of ownership in both print and broadcast media has left many communities without a viable news source sensitive to local issues and concerns.
Voting in 2022 is not going to be easy, but the potential costs encourage making the effort to getting it right.
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed10.asp
https://constitution.findlaw.com/article6.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/23/technology/voter-targeting-trump-score.html?action=cli
https://readingcalifornia.typepad.com/reading_california_fictio/2008/08/the-ninth-wave.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_480
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/magazine/billionaire-politics.html
https://tvnewscheck.com/business/article/nexstar-still-no-1-gray-scripps-allen-busy-buyers/