I just sent the following letter to the News & Observer, advocating that we be allowed to cast negative votes. That change would allow voters to better express their preferences since we sometimes care more about who loses than who wins.
How to improve voter satisfaction
In many elections (and especially this year?s), people lament that they can only vote for the lesser of two evils. Consequently, a large number don?t vote at all. There?s any harm in that, but I would like to suggest an election law change that would at least marginally increase voter satisfaction and probably turnout ? negative voting.
Surveying the ballot, I see some candidates whom I regard as honest and whose ideas about government I support enthusiastically, e.g. Mike Munger in the race for governor. On the other hand, there are also candidates I see as deceptive and peddling ideas that would be harmful, Senator Obama, for example. In the former, my strongest desire is to see Munger win; in the latter to see Obama lose.
The state should print its ballots so people can either cast a vote for or against one candidate in each race. The winner would be the one with the highest net total, subtracting the negative votes from the positive.
Would that change make any difference? Perhaps ? it might make third party candidates competitive whenever there is widespread dissatisfaction with the major party candidates. It might also reduce the hubris of winners for them to reflect on the number of voters who said, ?I don?t want you.?
George C. Leef
Raleigh
Would someone care to introduce a bill to accomplish this in the next session of the General Assembly? Think how cool it would be in the future to hear election night commentators saying, “And in North Carolina’s unique voting system, Candidate A is leading Candidate B, with 5 net votes to 4.”
