In modern times, there are many reasons to lament the power of voting. People claim disenfranchisement, worry about how a single vote can make a difference, and cite examples of voter fraud — all to the detriment of the modern democratic republic. All are valid worries. But assuming that one day these worries are reduced to near nonexistence, would voters have a case against the power of voting to change the political landscape?
If the current local-tax option vote is any indication, yes.
Supposedly — and I once thought it wasn’t much of a stretch to make this assumption — a vote for or against a public policy issue determined the likelihood of the issue coming to fruition. But following the sound defeat of local tax options across demographically and politically diverse communities, leaders are finding a way to explain away the outcomes. These explanations follow a similar pattern.
All voters are simply “dumb voters” who cannot possibly understand the funding needs behind the local tax options. Thus, any vote against more taxes, is a vote cast in ignorance. And a vote made in ignorance is not a real vote. Instead of looking at resounding numbers to the contrary, politicians still think that they can finagle their way into raising taxes. They?re not even considering that maybe they do have enough money to run core services — if they only cut spending to reflect these priorities.
Every vote, whether for or against their proposals, is positive (that link is hilarious). It’s leadership by addition. If you fail to make the votes on a new tax, simply rephrase it or find a new funding stream, and bring it up again until it passes. Cancel out previous votes by bringing up new ones. Don’t think about subtracting unnecessary expenses from the budget, simply justify them by claiming the budget as a whole is a single entity that must remain in tact or grow in order to be feasible.
Sadly, we live in a time of politics by addition, voting by subtraction.
