Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Does early voting sacrifice thorough decision-making and cause a disservice to the democratic process? Washington Times Editorial. October 29, 2012.


Being informed before casting a ballot is a civic duty. Although voters may scorn the kind of gutter politics that encourages an “October surprise” in a presidential election, crucial, late-breaking events often bring legitimate issues to the fore. Early voting adds convenience, but by sacrificing thorough decision-making it may end up disserving the democratic process.
The current contest between President Obama and GOP rival Mitt Romney makes the case. Americans who took advantage of early voting prior to last week hadn’t heard that the White House knew nearly in real time that the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was under attack on Sept. 11. These voters were unaware that U.S. forces were standing by to assist and that four besieged Americans likely died because no one in the administration would give the order to rescue them. This blunder probably wouldn’t convince many of Mr. Obama’s diehard backers to reconsider, but for other early voters, a change of heart would have come too late: Their votes were cast.
About 30 percent of the electorate voted early in 2008, according to George Mason University's United States Election Project. Whether due to military service, travel or simply the desire to avoid long lines on Election Day, the proportion could reach 40 percent this year. Thirty-two states and the District of Columbia allow some form of early voting.

No comments: