Single-Issue Voters: Will they make a difference on November 2nd?
Doug Curran
Issue date: 10/6/04 Section: News
- Page 1 of 1
The 2000 presidential election was decided by a handful of votes in a handful of states - a fact that, more than anything else, demonstrated to our generation the importance of casting a ballot. As first-time voters gear up for next month's election, however, many find themselves rushing to identify with a particular candidate, eager to establish a political identity for themselves. This, combined with the increasingly 'black and white' nature of politics, seems to have led many first-timers to cling to one cause and to plan to cast their vote based only on that issue. The Georgetown Independent spoke with students, faculty, and representatives from nonprofit organizations in an attempt to discover just how important one-issue voting will be to the outcome of the November second election.
The Effects of Nonprofits
As this year's election draws near, the efforts of those "getting out the vote" are becoming increasingly urgent and desperate. The groups distributing literature in Red Square, at the 9:30 club, on the sidewalks of M Street and everywhere in between are going to great lengths to register as many new voters as possible. As one organization, Music for America, puts it, "This November, the swing vote will either be a handful of 'soccer moms' in Ohio, or the 27 million members of your generation. Who would you rather cast the deciding vote?"
This general sentiment is reflected by many other organizations geared toward encouraging young voters to register as they often play up the importance of numbers and the drastic impact the youth vote could have on the election. People for the American Way (PFAW), a nonpartisan nonprofit, reminds the late-teen-early-twenties crowd that "The results of this election will determine your future...The last presidential election demonstrated the importance of every single vote, and the coming election may be even closer."
These groups even advise college students on how to best influence the election, encouraging them to register in a swing state if possible and to have parties designed to check up on the political activity of friends in an attempt, according to Music for America, to "make politics fun." PFAW asserts, "As a college student, you may have two choices for where to register and vote: your home address and your school address. If you have a choice, you should register and vote in a swing state, where your vote will have more power to influence the election."
While all of these campaigns are well-intentioned and young voters do have the ability to influence the November election, the question must be raised: are too many uninformed voters headed to the polls next month? Many of these organizations, while attempting to drive young voters and their friends to the polls, often glaze over that which is most important in placing a responsible vote in a presidential election: knowledge of the issues and candidates.
Rapper Sean Combs, Rock the Vote, and others encourage young people to pick an issue that is important to them and vote on that issue. Other organizations fail to even go that far, however, only briefly mentioning the need for new voters to be politically educated before casting their ballot. Music for America's pamphlet gives many ideas for helping with campaigns, becoming politically active and encouraging friends to do likewise, but only suggests in passing to "Google the issues that piss you off and rile up your friends by emailing them your research." Does this brief treatment of such an essential element of the political process aid in the maintenance of a sound democratic system?
Many of these organizations are at once fully aware of their liberal bias and claim nonpartisan status. The same Music for America pamphlet, while encouraging involvement in movements such as MoveOn.org, a strong anti-Bush campaign, then declares "This voter guide is not intended to support or oppose any candidate or political party." These mixed messages sent to young, first-time voters may prove to increase registration and turnout, but they may also hurt the long-term political health of American society.
Encouraging One-Issue Voters
The Georgetown community has no shortage of student groups that are taking an active role in tapping the virgin voter base that includes almost every Hoya on campus. In light of the impending election, these interest groups emphasize the political ramifications of their supported cause, and many endorse a candidate based on that single issue. Because of the young-voter registration efforts and the projected tightness of the presidential race, these interest groups and their national counterparts may have an opportunity in this election more so than in the past to convince political newcomers to vote for the candidate they support.
As Matt Singer (SFS '07) of the Georgetown Israel Alliance (GIA) asserts, "I believe Israel advocacy organizations across the country are doing a supreme job in registering citizens to vote...Here at Georgetown, GIA, last year, registered over a hundred voters. We pride ourselves in going door to door and engaging students." While GIA is a nonpartisan group that is in the unusual position of having both candidates support its interest, it remains politically active in tapping into the new voter segment of the community.
Becca Danis (SFS '06), president of Georgetown Right to Life, also recognizes the importance of this election claiming, "Our next president will most likely have the power to appoint as many as three Supreme Court Justices. Pro-life or pro-choice views will be an important consideration."
While not officially supporting Bush or Kerry because "Neither candidate is 100% pro-life," Right to Life wants "to encourage everyone to remember abortion as a factor that's deserving of serious consideration." Danis added, "We want pro-life people to understand what is at stake in this election." Right to Life hopes their efforts to spread pro-life information and to foster dialogue among students will result in a vote based on this issue. Danis believes, "This election presents a tremendous opportunity to make a difference by casting a vote for the dignity of all human life."
Is one-issue voting good for the election?
Numerous other student groups on campus are engaged in similar jockeying for their fellow Hoyas' attention by spreading information and attempting to spark dialogue. These groups are hoping to convince new voters to dedicate their precious vote to a single issue. Does this act - citizens casting votes based on only one issue - jeopardize the integrity of the election? Michael Bailey, Associate Professor in the Department of Government, asserts that it does not.
Bailey argues, "I think voting based on single issues allows people to register not only their preferences on an issue, but also their intensity. While we may not always agree with the choices the voters make, [one-issue voting] seems...reasonable...I don't think that democracy would be better off if people who made decisions in one way were excluded."
Regarding the efforts of the nonprofit organizations discussed above, Bailey thinks, "these groups should do whatever it takes to increase voting among younger people - within reason." He defends this stance by contending, "If [encouraging one-issue voting] is a good way to gently introduce younger voters to the voting booth, then I am all for it."
Scott Zumwalt (COL '06), president of Georgetown University College Democrats, disagrees. Zumwalt says, "Sometimes one-issue voters wear blinders and avoid all other pertinent issues because they are so focused on one topic...Voters should test-drive candidates overall before they come to a quick decision based on one issue." Zumwalt agrees with Bailey that "one-issue voters should vote," but maintains that "many of these one-issue voters never take into account the big picture, as they should."
Like Zumwalt, Maya Noronha (COL '05) of the Georgetown University College Republicans, believes that "a superficial analysis of the issues is not healthy. One must go in depth to understand the underlying philosophy of candidates and whether that vision is right for America." Noronha also points out, however, that "By framing an election over a minimized agenda, it can be easier for voters to compare candidates."
While most agree that those afforded the right to vote are justified in casting their ballot for whomever they choose and for whatever reasons, there also exists a student consensus that voters have a responsibility to be more than just superficially informed about a candidate and his platform. While GIA's Singer agrees with Professor Bailey, saying, "No one has the right to deny citizens [the right] to vote, no matter their credo or belief," Singer ultimately comes down on the side of Zumwalt and Noronha, insisting, "I would encourage citizens to study both candidates' platforms in order to make an educated decision about the candidate that most supports their ideals and visions for America. Voting for a candidate based solely on one issue can be a mistake as the candidate's other policies might contradict...your beliefs."
Despite the above objections to voting solely on one issue, those interviewed never questioned the wisdom of one-issue voters. When asked if one-issues voters were less informed than others, Singer responds, "Walking around campus and talking to students, I have found that every student has one issue that supersedes all others...Each person is affected differently by the candidates' stances on these important issues and may be more supportive or hesitant in supporting a candidate [because of these stances]... The other issues to do not simply disappear from the minds of Americans but are still reflected in their vote for president." Noronha adds, "It is difficult, and even somewhat dangerous, to characterize the education of voters based on what issues they prioritize."
Voters that ultimately make their choice based on a single issue, it can be gathered, should not in any way be discouraged from submitting their ballot. While it is not wise for these individuals to vote without an understanding of the supported candidate's platform - because, as Singer points out, the candidate's other positions may be at odds with their own - it is a valid practice to cast a vote for the issue that most affects a particular voter. In so doing, as Professor Bailey maintains, the voter registers his or her "intensity" of belief on the issue. Such is the case with Danis and her devotion to the Right to Life cause.
What does one-issue voting mean to the candidates?
As noted above, many of the nonprofit organizations endeavoring to register as many young voters as possible have a clear liberal bias. Because of this, it seems that Senator John Kerry and the Democratic Party would likely benefit from these young voters' ballots cast on election day. However, whether the issue is Iraq, foreign policy, abortion rights or others, many of the 'hot topics' on the political discussion table have equal numbers on both sides, even among young voters. In fact, the 2000 presidential campaign saw the youth vote split evenly between Al Gore and George W. Bush. Because of this, many, like Danis, dispute the perception that young voters tend to be more liberal. "Poll after poll has shown that our generation is more pro-life than our parents," she said. So, despite a summer Pew Research Center poll of 18-29 year-olds that was split 56% - 41% in Kerry's favor, it is not at all clear whether young voters will lean to the left or to the right.
Professor Bailey agrees. When asked which candidate he thought would benefit more from the mobilization of one-issue voters he initially said, "In general, Bush, as the NRA and the pro-life groups are quite effective, especially in certain parts of the country." He was quick to follow that statement up, however, saying, "Kerry will do well with other groups, though, including pro-choice and pro-gay groups."
When asked the same question, Zumwalt of the College Democrats responded with equal imprecision. "It is tough to say...It all depends on which issue gets the spotlight during and following the debates."
Is one-issue voting on the rise?
Next month will be the first presidential election in the drastically altered American political landscape of the post-9/11 era. This campaign season has seen increased attention paid to international affairs and public diplomacy, issues that have played less apparent roles in previous presidential races. Opinion polls repeatedly demonstrate, however, that domestic issues such as the economy, taxes, and health care continue to play a vital role in this year's election. Is the war in Iraq or Afghanistan, or the general 'war' on terror going to be the single issue that determines how voters cast their ballots? Will the record increase of newly-registered voters produce the reality of millions of votes being cast based on one issue only? Both seem unlikely.
While GIA's Singer believes that, "Within the last decade there has been a trend in placing more importance on one-issue voting than in the past," he also asserts that, "The debate on one-issue voting is over-exaggerating the seriousness of the trend. I believe voters are trying to better educate themselves on issues rather than toeing party lines, which is encouraging because it proves citizens are actively engaging in the political process."
Professor Bailey agrees, saying, "I don't foresee a major increase in one-issue voting in this election. I think this election will have a lot more big-scale ideology in it - people are lining up on one side or the other based on a variety of issues: Iraq, economy, taxes, environment, et cetera."
Despite the apparent broadening of the issues in the national conscience going into this election, both GU College Democrats' Zumwalt and GU College Republicans' Noronha believe that single-issue voters may still be an important and influential group on November 2. Zumwalt declares, "One-issue voting could have the possibility of being more important in this election if the Republicans get their way. The Republican Party is trying to shape the debate with wedge issues like gay marriage, God and guns because they do not want the American people to see their failed record."
While Noronha would no doubt refute that attack, she agrees that single-issue voters remain an important segment. She says, "In this election, the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan tend to take front seat to other issues," but then also suggests that "The effect of one-issue voting depends on what issue it involves. A variety of Americans may vote on the issue of abortion or Iraq this election. An informed voter, even if it may concern a single important issue, is better than an uninformed one."
Whether or not single-issue voting is on the rise, it is clear that those who vote on only one issue exist even in today's world of complex and assorted campaign platforms. These voters, however, cannot be considered to be a political force as such because the issues they deem important and the positions they take on those issues are many and varied.
While voters across the country gear up for next month's election, national nonprofits and campus student groups continue to register new voters and attempt to influence the decision they will make in the polling booth. Knowledge of the candidate and his platform that a voter intends to support must, of course, be a priority, but casting a vote based on an issue that has particular significance must not be discouraged.
Curran is associate editor and an international politics junior.
The Effects of Nonprofits
As this year's election draws near, the efforts of those "getting out the vote" are becoming increasingly urgent and desperate. The groups distributing literature in Red Square, at the 9:30 club, on the sidewalks of M Street and everywhere in between are going to great lengths to register as many new voters as possible. As one organization, Music for America, puts it, "This November, the swing vote will either be a handful of 'soccer moms' in Ohio, or the 27 million members of your generation. Who would you rather cast the deciding vote?"
This general sentiment is reflected by many other organizations geared toward encouraging young voters to register as they often play up the importance of numbers and the drastic impact the youth vote could have on the election. People for the American Way (PFAW), a nonpartisan nonprofit, reminds the late-teen-early-twenties crowd that "The results of this election will determine your future...The last presidential election demonstrated the importance of every single vote, and the coming election may be even closer."
These groups even advise college students on how to best influence the election, encouraging them to register in a swing state if possible and to have parties designed to check up on the political activity of friends in an attempt, according to Music for America, to "make politics fun." PFAW asserts, "As a college student, you may have two choices for where to register and vote: your home address and your school address. If you have a choice, you should register and vote in a swing state, where your vote will have more power to influence the election."
While all of these campaigns are well-intentioned and young voters do have the ability to influence the November election, the question must be raised: are too many uninformed voters headed to the polls next month? Many of these organizations, while attempting to drive young voters and their friends to the polls, often glaze over that which is most important in placing a responsible vote in a presidential election: knowledge of the issues and candidates.
Rapper Sean Combs, Rock the Vote, and others encourage young people to pick an issue that is important to them and vote on that issue. Other organizations fail to even go that far, however, only briefly mentioning the need for new voters to be politically educated before casting their ballot. Music for America's pamphlet gives many ideas for helping with campaigns, becoming politically active and encouraging friends to do likewise, but only suggests in passing to "Google the issues that piss you off and rile up your friends by emailing them your research." Does this brief treatment of such an essential element of the political process aid in the maintenance of a sound democratic system?
Many of these organizations are at once fully aware of their liberal bias and claim nonpartisan status. The same Music for America pamphlet, while encouraging involvement in movements such as MoveOn.org, a strong anti-Bush campaign, then declares "This voter guide is not intended to support or oppose any candidate or political party." These mixed messages sent to young, first-time voters may prove to increase registration and turnout, but they may also hurt the long-term political health of American society.
Encouraging One-Issue Voters
The Georgetown community has no shortage of student groups that are taking an active role in tapping the virgin voter base that includes almost every Hoya on campus. In light of the impending election, these interest groups emphasize the political ramifications of their supported cause, and many endorse a candidate based on that single issue. Because of the young-voter registration efforts and the projected tightness of the presidential race, these interest groups and their national counterparts may have an opportunity in this election more so than in the past to convince political newcomers to vote for the candidate they support.
As Matt Singer (SFS '07) of the Georgetown Israel Alliance (GIA) asserts, "I believe Israel advocacy organizations across the country are doing a supreme job in registering citizens to vote...Here at Georgetown, GIA, last year, registered over a hundred voters. We pride ourselves in going door to door and engaging students." While GIA is a nonpartisan group that is in the unusual position of having both candidates support its interest, it remains politically active in tapping into the new voter segment of the community.
Becca Danis (SFS '06), president of Georgetown Right to Life, also recognizes the importance of this election claiming, "Our next president will most likely have the power to appoint as many as three Supreme Court Justices. Pro-life or pro-choice views will be an important consideration."
While not officially supporting Bush or Kerry because "Neither candidate is 100% pro-life," Right to Life wants "to encourage everyone to remember abortion as a factor that's deserving of serious consideration." Danis added, "We want pro-life people to understand what is at stake in this election." Right to Life hopes their efforts to spread pro-life information and to foster dialogue among students will result in a vote based on this issue. Danis believes, "This election presents a tremendous opportunity to make a difference by casting a vote for the dignity of all human life."
Is one-issue voting good for the election?
Numerous other student groups on campus are engaged in similar jockeying for their fellow Hoyas' attention by spreading information and attempting to spark dialogue. These groups are hoping to convince new voters to dedicate their precious vote to a single issue. Does this act - citizens casting votes based on only one issue - jeopardize the integrity of the election? Michael Bailey, Associate Professor in the Department of Government, asserts that it does not.
Bailey argues, "I think voting based on single issues allows people to register not only their preferences on an issue, but also their intensity. While we may not always agree with the choices the voters make, [one-issue voting] seems...reasonable...I don't think that democracy would be better off if people who made decisions in one way were excluded."
Regarding the efforts of the nonprofit organizations discussed above, Bailey thinks, "these groups should do whatever it takes to increase voting among younger people - within reason." He defends this stance by contending, "If [encouraging one-issue voting] is a good way to gently introduce younger voters to the voting booth, then I am all for it."
Scott Zumwalt (COL '06), president of Georgetown University College Democrats, disagrees. Zumwalt says, "Sometimes one-issue voters wear blinders and avoid all other pertinent issues because they are so focused on one topic...Voters should test-drive candidates overall before they come to a quick decision based on one issue." Zumwalt agrees with Bailey that "one-issue voters should vote," but maintains that "many of these one-issue voters never take into account the big picture, as they should."
Like Zumwalt, Maya Noronha (COL '05) of the Georgetown University College Republicans, believes that "a superficial analysis of the issues is not healthy. One must go in depth to understand the underlying philosophy of candidates and whether that vision is right for America." Noronha also points out, however, that "By framing an election over a minimized agenda, it can be easier for voters to compare candidates."
While most agree that those afforded the right to vote are justified in casting their ballot for whomever they choose and for whatever reasons, there also exists a student consensus that voters have a responsibility to be more than just superficially informed about a candidate and his platform. While GIA's Singer agrees with Professor Bailey, saying, "No one has the right to deny citizens [the right] to vote, no matter their credo or belief," Singer ultimately comes down on the side of Zumwalt and Noronha, insisting, "I would encourage citizens to study both candidates' platforms in order to make an educated decision about the candidate that most supports their ideals and visions for America. Voting for a candidate based solely on one issue can be a mistake as the candidate's other policies might contradict...your beliefs."
Despite the above objections to voting solely on one issue, those interviewed never questioned the wisdom of one-issue voters. When asked if one-issues voters were less informed than others, Singer responds, "Walking around campus and talking to students, I have found that every student has one issue that supersedes all others...Each person is affected differently by the candidates' stances on these important issues and may be more supportive or hesitant in supporting a candidate [because of these stances]... The other issues to do not simply disappear from the minds of Americans but are still reflected in their vote for president." Noronha adds, "It is difficult, and even somewhat dangerous, to characterize the education of voters based on what issues they prioritize."
Voters that ultimately make their choice based on a single issue, it can be gathered, should not in any way be discouraged from submitting their ballot. While it is not wise for these individuals to vote without an understanding of the supported candidate's platform - because, as Singer points out, the candidate's other positions may be at odds with their own - it is a valid practice to cast a vote for the issue that most affects a particular voter. In so doing, as Professor Bailey maintains, the voter registers his or her "intensity" of belief on the issue. Such is the case with Danis and her devotion to the Right to Life cause.
What does one-issue voting mean to the candidates?
As noted above, many of the nonprofit organizations endeavoring to register as many young voters as possible have a clear liberal bias. Because of this, it seems that Senator John Kerry and the Democratic Party would likely benefit from these young voters' ballots cast on election day. However, whether the issue is Iraq, foreign policy, abortion rights or others, many of the 'hot topics' on the political discussion table have equal numbers on both sides, even among young voters. In fact, the 2000 presidential campaign saw the youth vote split evenly between Al Gore and George W. Bush. Because of this, many, like Danis, dispute the perception that young voters tend to be more liberal. "Poll after poll has shown that our generation is more pro-life than our parents," she said. So, despite a summer Pew Research Center poll of 18-29 year-olds that was split 56% - 41% in Kerry's favor, it is not at all clear whether young voters will lean to the left or to the right.
Professor Bailey agrees. When asked which candidate he thought would benefit more from the mobilization of one-issue voters he initially said, "In general, Bush, as the NRA and the pro-life groups are quite effective, especially in certain parts of the country." He was quick to follow that statement up, however, saying, "Kerry will do well with other groups, though, including pro-choice and pro-gay groups."
When asked the same question, Zumwalt of the College Democrats responded with equal imprecision. "It is tough to say...It all depends on which issue gets the spotlight during and following the debates."
Is one-issue voting on the rise?
Next month will be the first presidential election in the drastically altered American political landscape of the post-9/11 era. This campaign season has seen increased attention paid to international affairs and public diplomacy, issues that have played less apparent roles in previous presidential races. Opinion polls repeatedly demonstrate, however, that domestic issues such as the economy, taxes, and health care continue to play a vital role in this year's election. Is the war in Iraq or Afghanistan, or the general 'war' on terror going to be the single issue that determines how voters cast their ballots? Will the record increase of newly-registered voters produce the reality of millions of votes being cast based on one issue only? Both seem unlikely.
While GIA's Singer believes that, "Within the last decade there has been a trend in placing more importance on one-issue voting than in the past," he also asserts that, "The debate on one-issue voting is over-exaggerating the seriousness of the trend. I believe voters are trying to better educate themselves on issues rather than toeing party lines, which is encouraging because it proves citizens are actively engaging in the political process."
Professor Bailey agrees, saying, "I don't foresee a major increase in one-issue voting in this election. I think this election will have a lot more big-scale ideology in it - people are lining up on one side or the other based on a variety of issues: Iraq, economy, taxes, environment, et cetera."
Despite the apparent broadening of the issues in the national conscience going into this election, both GU College Democrats' Zumwalt and GU College Republicans' Noronha believe that single-issue voters may still be an important and influential group on November 2. Zumwalt declares, "One-issue voting could have the possibility of being more important in this election if the Republicans get their way. The Republican Party is trying to shape the debate with wedge issues like gay marriage, God and guns because they do not want the American people to see their failed record."
While Noronha would no doubt refute that attack, she agrees that single-issue voters remain an important segment. She says, "In this election, the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan tend to take front seat to other issues," but then also suggests that "The effect of one-issue voting depends on what issue it involves. A variety of Americans may vote on the issue of abortion or Iraq this election. An informed voter, even if it may concern a single important issue, is better than an uninformed one."
Whether or not single-issue voting is on the rise, it is clear that those who vote on only one issue exist even in today's world of complex and assorted campaign platforms. These voters, however, cannot be considered to be a political force as such because the issues they deem important and the positions they take on those issues are many and varied.
While voters across the country gear up for next month's election, national nonprofits and campus student groups continue to register new voters and attempt to influence the decision they will make in the polling booth. Knowledge of the candidate and his platform that a voter intends to support must, of course, be a priority, but casting a vote based on an issue that has particular significance must not be discouraged.
Curran is associate editor and an international politics junior.