A Social Duty of Solemn Nature

"Impress upon children the truth that the exercise of the elective franchise is a social duty of as solemn a nature as man can be called to perform; that a man may not innocently trifle with his vote; that every elector is a trustee as well for others as himself and that every measure he supports has an important bearing on the interests of others as well as on his own."

Daniel Webster, The Works of Daniel Webster, 1853

By "the elective franchise" Daniel Webster was referring, of course, to the people's right to vote in free and open political elections. Webster was expressing his belief that the individual's vote was not simply a right to be exercised, but a very important civic responsibility...a responsibility that we, as citizens, must not only meet, but teach future generations of citizens to meet as well.

I agree.

Unfortunately, if recent Long Beach (CA) election results are any indication, far too few of us seem to feel the way that Webster -a Constitutional scholar, former U.S. Senator, and U.S. Secretary of State- felt about the right and the responsibility of voting.

According to preliminary election results from the City Clerk's office in my hometown of Long Beach, a mere 11.3% of eligible registered voters bothered to cast a ballot in the local primary election just held on Tuesday, April 10, 2012.

http://www2.longbeach.gov/cityclerk/elections/results/cumulative.html

Only about 17,000 of a total population of about 153,000 registered voters (in the effected precincts) either showed up at a polling place or mailed in a ballot. Think about that for a moment.

About 136,000 registered voters who could have done so, failed to take advantage of their opportunity to provide their, direct, personal, and individual input into the election of three City Councilmembers, one Community College trustee, and two School Board trustees.

About 136 thousand registered voters opted out. That's about the current total population of entire nearby Southern California cities such as Pasadena, Orange, and Fullerton.

http://www.citypopulation.de/USA-California.html

136 thousand people represents over ten times the total population of Signal Hill, CA, which the City of Long Beach completely surrounds. Over ten times the total population of a neighboring city simply did not participate in the election of some of their own local government officials. Elected officials who, in the case of the three Councilmembers, share, with their four Council colleagues and a Mayor, exclusive legislative responsibility for a city of over 50 square miles, almost half a million people, and an annual budget of hundreds of millions of dollars in public funds.

Only 11.3% of eligible registered voters in Long Beach turned out this time. Why is that, do you think?

It has been said that the government that is closest to the people, governs best. If this is true, then voters who truly desire to influence the government that is closest to them...that has the most direct influence upon their daily lives and the most direct control over their public spaces, properties, and funds...should be participating more in their local elections, not less.

So why do you think they are not?

And how do you think we might encourage more of our qualified residents to register to vote and then encourage more of our registered voters to follow through and meet this important civic responsibility in our (or any) community?