The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves
By Norman Leahy | Tuesday, December 27th, 2011 | Culture, Economics, Politics, VirginiaWith all the hub-bub surrounding the failure of most of the GOP presidential campaigns to make the Virginia primary ballot (either due to lack of effort, a failed system, a deep conspiracy or a reason to be named later), one common thread has managed to emerge:
Virginia voters now lack choice on the ballot. This is bad and must be changed — either retroactively or, at minimum, very soon.
As much as I sympathize with this view, and my strong bias is toward ballot laws that allow wider choices than either the frick-and-frack Democrats or Republicans, there’s a strong argument to be made that allowing more choice, per se, is exactly the wrong way to go. Back in 2007, I wrote a piece for the old (and excellent) Bacon’s Rebellion e-zine on George Mason University Prof. Bryan Caplan’s book, “The Myth of the Rational Voter.”
Caplan didn’t address ballot rules or primary voting specifically. He did, however, write about how voters can, and do, use their trips to the polls to render verdicts that would confuse Solomon:
Caplan argues that when irrational voters get together on election day, they create a form of “political pollution,” where the costs of indulging their individual biases and misconceptions is shared by everyone… to the detriment of us all.
The theory flies in the face of most of the accepted wisdom regarding democracies (republics, too) and the sovereign citizen. Bad outcomes stem from special interests, most will say. Poor policies can be overcome through voter education and a return to principle, as I’ve often said.
But in “The Myth of the Rational Voter,” Caplan states that these arguments just aren’t true. Instead:
In the naïve public interest view, democracy works because it does what voters want. In the view of democracy skeptics, it fails because it does not do what voters want. In my view, democracy fails because it does what voters want. In economic jargon, democracy has a built-in externality. An irrational voter does not hurt only himself. He also hurts everyone who is, as a result of his irrationality, more likely to live under misguided policies. Since most of the cost of voter irrationality is external – paid for by other people, why not indulge? If enough voters think this way, socially injurious policies win by popular demand.
It’s not a popular thesis. We like to think of ourselves as sensible people who make sane choices. It’s the guy behind the tree who is the real problem…and he thinks the same of us.
Caplan approached the issue through an economist’s lens. Many will have a problem with that, and charge that economists are no more bias-free than the rest of us. But his thesis is worth considering in light not only of the recent ballot unpleasantness, but also as we move toward another of those “most important ever” national elections.
If the nation is heading on the wrong course, if you disagree with this or that process, politician, party or policy, remember that when pointing the finger of blame, three fingers point back at you.
Or at the guy behind the tree.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Norm Leahy has written about Virginia and national politics online since 2002, beginning with One Man's Trash (OMT), and continuing through Bacon's Rebellion (both the blog and the e-zine), Sic Semper Tyrannis, NBC12's Decision Virginia, Richmond.com and Tertium Quids. He is the chief blogger at "The Score" and a producer of "The Score" radio show as well as being a Washington Post contributor.
Comments
8 Responses to "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves"
Yes, as I believe de Tocqueville said, democracy is all sail and no anchor. That’s why we don’t a direct democracy but a republic in which we elect representatives who are supposed to act in the public interest. Public opinion is a part of that, but so is study, analysis, and compromise. In fact, I believe the political elites hava a responsibility to engage in a form of public education by acting responsibly to consider all sides of an issue.
Those who are unduly influenced by the theory of the day, week, month, or year so us all a disservice and ought to go back to the farm and think awhile.
There’s no questin that Virginia has tough ballot access laws. But everybody knew that, or should have, going in. It appears to me that there’s not much that can be done to save those campaigns from their own incompetency.
There is one party that believes in the power of government to save individuals from themselves but it doesn’t begin with a R…
“Public opinion is a part of that, but so is study, analysis, and compromise. In fact, I believe the political elites hava a responsibility to engage in a form of public education by acting responsibly to consider all sides of an issue.”
Your day is done. Now that we are $15 trillion in debt and going down the drain an additional $3 billion a day, there is no question that this is the most important election of our lifetime. This isn’t an environment for one for you and one for me politics as usual.
Revolutionary change is required from within or our creditors (and their bankers) who don’t like us so much will be imposing it from acoss borders. The status quo is that our future is bleak. It will take leadership more radical than the norm to change course. It will take leadership that is willing to challenge, chide and disrupt. That’s leadership who is willing to tick people off (like Ronald Reagan did for the first three years of his administration) to get the change process in place.
Mitt Romeny has the leadership skills and the commitment of a wet noodle. He is old school politics. That’s why he doesn’t poll better than 25 percent. The people, the populists, they understand at the base level the challenges we face. And the political leaders in the RPV are doofuses for not realizing that the 75 percent would be willing to coalesce around a candidate that’s not Romney. I must ask just elite are the elite if they can’t understand what is happening around them?
Another good post, Norm. I agree. The problem is not that ballot access is too difficult in Virginia, but that it is too lenient in other states. I have read a couple of pieces since this kerfuffle began that placed blame on the fact that most of the candidates were concentrating on the early primary states and too busy to get organized in Virginia. Wrong answer. A viable presidential campaign doesn’t move from one state to another in chronological order of the primaries. It must have 50 state organizations working for a year before the first primary. If that concept was followed in most states and not just Virginia, then we wouldn’t have these bloated freak shows of unelectable egotists every four years by the party not in the White House. I love it when liberals poke fun at the 1-percenters running this year in the Republican Party. How quickly they forget the Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel candidates that clogged the Democratic field four years ago. We have a two-party republican system of government in our country, not a parlimentary government based on multi-party coalitions. There is nothing inherently unfair or inequitable about the two major parties limiting their nominating process to a small number of proven leaders with a realistic chance of winning the general election. For those who disagree with that statement, I ask this: is it any more fair or equitable that Barack Obama with his 40% job approval rating isn’t even being challenged by his own party? To me that is a bigger concern than the fact that Newt and Pastor Rich couldn’t get their acts together and qualify for the Virginia primary. That is not to say that a totally obscure fringe candidate can’t come out of nowhere and win it all. That is precisely how a peanut farmer from Georgia became the 39th POTUS. And look how well that worked out.
Agree, MD Russ, Obama ought to be challenged!
Great post, Norm.
Good article, Norm. I was worried for a while that I might be offended by the condescending nature of the text. I am still in the “Poor policies can be overcome through voter education and a return to principle” camp… The answer can not be to limit choices, or participation by those silly uniformed and selfish voters. The problems are systemic, cultural, and must be addressed outside of campaigns. If the only time we worry about the quality of the voter is during a campaign, then we deserve the voters we have. That only two of the candidates managed (or bothered) to qualify in Virginia is indeed very disappointing, but being sued by Rick Perry is the most disappointing of all.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.