Citizen Bane

Umbra on the importance of voting 9

Dear Umbra,

I have a friend who is a fellow environmental studies major, and he says he's not going to vote because he "doesn't agree with the system." I've had numerous discussions with him about how important it is to vote, especially when it comes to environmental issues, but he doesn't seem to want to listen. My question to you is this: Why, as an environmentalist, should I vote?

Nick
Wyoming, Minn.

Dear Nick,

I grant you, our particular system of democracy is flawed. But pouting on the sidelines is not effective. Politics contains no über-moms who will take your hand, listen to your complaints, and report your troubles to the president so he/she can take action on your behalf.

Adulthood brings with it the responsibility to be a good citizen, and citizenship requires voting. So does environmentalism. Environmentalists should vote in every election, and particularly in local and state contests for town and county officers, council members, state insurance commissioners, and state congresspersons. These are the people who decide on funding for schools, highways, and public transit, or who make laws forbidding people from marrying, or who allow developers to destroy wetlands.

Photos: Hilary McHone

Local politicians and their constituents strongly influence area land use and planning. I took a look at the website for Chisago County, where you live, and found quite a few examples within five minutes of rapid clicking. This summer alone, your county planning commission discussed a demolition landfill, a composting operation, and a green corridor for land preservation. The summer of 2007 was the 14th year of a water quality improvement program for the Chisago Chain of Lakes, northeast of Wyoming. The county Environmental Services staff has found septic systems that were imminent threats to public health and has interceded. Just a few examples of environmentally significant local politics.

Day-to-day work in towns and counties is carried out by hired staffers, but the agenda for their work is heavily (and sometimes completely) influenced by elected officials and political appointees. You can see this dynamic at work on the federal level as well -- in the Environmental Protection Agency, for example. With President Clinton at the helm, the EPA had one agenda; with George W. in the White House it's had quite another. Imagine a vote for or against a candidate who supports unfettered land development, or one who believes industry should police itself!

In Seattle, for another example, we are often called upon to vote for or against major transportation projects. The last time this happened, many of us voted against a proposition that would have authorized a giant highway expansion and some (but not enough) mass transit. The measure failed, thus sending legislators a message that citizens placed a high value on mass transit options. The non-voters (like your friend) might have had a message too, but no one could possibly get it. What are non-voters saying? "Whatever," basically.

State-level voting also makes an impact. As I'm sure you've seen, candidates often have major differences on environmental issues related to agriculture, watersheds, energy, transportation, and business vs. the environment. A state government not only makes policy within its boundaries, but can also choose (or refuse) to join with other states in environmental actions. You've read in Grist about states adopting California's auto standards, or about multi-state carbon cap-and-trade projects, or about Midwestern governors signing a greenhouse-gas reduction accord. City leaders can join hands, too, as we're seeing with the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement, signed by 884 mayors to date. This happens because environmentally conscious elected officials have the say-so. The local and state actions push the federal government to respond (no matter how much it wishes to ignore things). The trickle-up-and-push effect of our vote has been our main influence on national environmental policy for many years.

All of which is to say: Vote. It matters. Register today.

Simply,
Umbra

 

Yours is to wonder why, hers is to answer (or try). Send your green-living questions to Umbra.

Umbra Fisk is Grist Research Associate II, Hardcover and Periodicals Unit, floors 2B-4B.

Related Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. Annie Rosenthal's avatar

    Annie Rosenthal Posted 9:35 am
    22 Sep 2008

    VotingYou ROCK Umbra and you are so right.  At least if you vote you have a right to speak your mind publicly for or against whoever or whatever gets voted in.  Thanks!

    Permalink

  2. sindark's avatar

    sindark Posted 10:01 am
    22 Sep 2008

    Encourage environmental candidatesThere is also a vicious spiral to avoid.
    If people who care about the environment don't vote, there will be no environmentally minded votes to capture. As such, rational politicians will ignore environmental issues or court people who do vote and who take more short term perspectives on things like resource use and sustainability.

    Permalink

  3. francoise lehouck Posted 11:15 am
    22 Sep 2008

    on the importance of votingGo to Zeitgeist on the internet and watch... it might give you ideas on why vote or not vote - or at least make you aware of what is going on up there.

    Permalink

  4. demolitionwoman Posted 11:30 am
    22 Sep 2008

    why NOT vote?i mean, really?  maybe he's right, maybe it doesn't matter...but what if it does?  that's what i'd say to him - what if it does?  does he know 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt?  i don't think so...
    what if it does?  why not take the 20 minutes out of his day to go to his local voting booth, see people from his neighborhood and cast his vote.
    less than half of our country votes (on average) and christ, does it show...it's the raindrop effect:  one raindrop might not seem like much, but when you put millions of 'em together - hello downpour!
    there's a reason why people have been (and continue to be) excluded from the right to vote (black people, women, non-land owners, felons, poor people, etc.)  why would the people in power work so hard to exclude people from something that "doesn't matter"?  people have fought fiercely and literally died to have this right that your friend so casually dismisses.
    and if he still doesn't vote?  anytime he tries to talk politics to you or complains about the state of the environment, etc. - just ask "did you vote?  no?  well then, you do not have the right to bitch about it."  
    voting is the minimum we as citizens can do to participate in our communities.  

    Permalink

  5. bailsout Posted 1:48 pm
    22 Sep 2008

    Vote for the recordEven though one educated vote is erased by an uneducated vote, Kurt Vonnegut averred in one of his books, maybe Piano Player, "you vote for the record", you vote for your conscience. Our democracy is a joke: the majority of the populous is uninformed and have a C average. And their vote is equal to someone's who has spent hours investigating the issue and reading through truths and lies. There is a better way, but the majority is not intelligent enough to see it.

    Permalink

  6. pfletch Posted 2:51 pm
    22 Sep 2008

    They KNOW if you vote!I don't agree with the "system" either - especially if your friend is referring to the Electoral College.  However, i was stunned to realize that, along with my voter registration and party preference (or lack thereof), my publicly-available record shows whether or not i have voted recently - for every year!  No, it doesn't say for whom i voted, but it does show every primary, school or parks funding, and November election in which i have voted.
    Therefore, when i stand up in the council meeting or write to my representative, i can say (and know that they can check), "I'm an environmentalist and I VOTE every chance i get."

    Permalink

  7. jbantau Posted 2:16 am
    23 Sep 2008

    Don't be part of the problemI will not be part of the problem.  If the planet goes to hell I want to be able to say that I didn't contribute to the problem.  I wanna be able to say I did what I could. That includes voting this year, for the first time.  Maybe my vote won't change a thing, but I can go on feeling good about my contributions to this society.

    Permalink

  8. megermano Posted 3:15 am
    23 Sep 2008

    Don't forget!I would recommend to vote third party, both the Republican and Democratic Parties mistreat this democracy we have, both minimizing the importance of the Independent Party. You are sending a message that you vote, and you do not approve of either Dem. nor Rep. parties. I will keep it simple and end here.

    Permalink

  9. GonzoDon Posted 6:59 am
    23 Sep 2008

    @ megermano: Before you don't forget!I would recommend instituting instant-runoff voting (IRV) in your state first.  THEN you can vote third-party to your heart's content ... without the nagging suspicion that you're simply wasting your vote under our de facto two-party system.  The major parties count on the latter.  (How else to explain bizarre developments like conservative Repugs sending money to the Nader campaign?)
    Think.  This doesn't have to be an either-or, between-the-horns dilemma.  Do the hard work of implementing IRV and you get the best of both worlds.  Vote for your true first choice first (what a concept!!).  If he/she doesn't get a majority of the votes, then your second choice does.
    It almost makes too much sense.

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement