Why I Don't Vote (in national elections)

Given all the attention around campus about voting recently, I decided to weigh in on the election and write to the editor of GMU's newspaper the Broadside. Here is what was published:

Who are you voting for? I hear this question nearly every day as the national election approaches. Often people look to me for advice on this issue because I am the president of George Mason University’s Economics Society, expecting a reasoned response why one candidate is better than another on economic issues.

What answer do I give? I simply respond: “I don’t vote.”

CLICK READ MORE for the rest of the post.

Am I apathetic about economic, international, or other policy? No; in fact I hold very strong opinions about public policy. What I am apathetic about is the impact of my vote.

The reason I feel this way is mainly because of the public choice school of economics. This school of thought was founded by two of Mason’s greatest scholars, Gordon Tullock and Nobel laureate James Buchanan, who revolutionized the way the world looks at politics. Public Choice says that if we assume people act relatively self-interested in their personal lives we should assume they will act self-interested in their public lives. Just as regular citizens act to increase their benefits, politicians act to increase their own gains.

In a democratic election process, the winner must win at least 51 percent of the vote. To get the 51 percent, the candidate must not only sway the fringe party members but they must seek to satisfy the preferences of the moderates. It is more likely to get your own hardcore party members to vote for you, but much harder to get the moderates and independents. It is no surprise then that politicians aim to formulate policies based upon the wants of these moderate, or median, voters.

Since both presidential candidates are fighting over the same wants of the median voter, one would expect to see very similar policies from each. This tends to be the case throughout history—President George W. Bush’s policies were more leftist than his critics would let on and former President Bill Clinton was much more conservative than pundits would admit.

The takeaway is that whether Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., or Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. wins, the policies they are offering must be very similar if they are rational and want the most votes. You may still not be convinced though, saying perhaps the slight changes in implementation or experience matter as to voting for one or the other. Public choice economics has an excellent response to this argument: the Returns to Voting Model.

Most people recognize that the probability of their vote mattering in a national election, even with the Electoral College system, is infinitesimally small. You have a higher probability of dying in a car crash on the way to vote than you have of your vote individually deciding the election. The benefit to you of voting then is a small number multiplied by a very tiny number. Add on the cost of voting—missing school, work, or reading a book—and most likely you have a negative return from voting.

Despite these statistical truths, many millions of Americans will still go out and vote on Nov. 4. These voters are not irrational; they get their pleasure out of participating in the democratic process that has been passed down from our founding fathers. Voting “for fun” in this way is in fact very rational. Voting for change in policy is not. If you want to make the world better off, you’ll do much better by volunteering, educating others, or just yourself, on important issues. But if you are still planning on voting next Tuesday, by all means, enjoy yourself.

Sincerely,

Kevin R. Hilferty

President, GMU Economics Society

Wall Street Bail-out and Economic Development

With the recent financial crisis in the United States, most of the debate we hear currently entails whether or not the government should be involved in some sort of bail-out. While this would be a major intervention, William Easterly, in a today's op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, says that the U.S. will still remain largely capitalistic and the domestic effect is not the largest worry. To Dr. Easterly, the issue at hand is what message this policy choice sends to developing countries' governments. While we may be choosing between some or more intervention, he contends that developing nations are choosing between free markets and government planning for economic growth.

For better or worse, our actions and beliefs today will affect the policies for many years to come of these countries. The point Easterly makes is an important one, and echos that of F.A. Hayek in "The Intellectuals and Socialism". Whether you agree or disagree with government intervention, it is difficult to ignore the importance of the role our policy decisions play in steering developing governments' future actions.

If any of you feel inspired by this issue or any development issues, there will be an opportunity for you to share your ideas to other students and non-profit organizations in an upcoming conference at Mason. A private consulting firm Midego Inc. from Fairfax, Virginia will be co-hosting the conference with the student group Global Health Students Beyond Borders in February. Here is more info:

"The conference is entitled "Breaking with Business As Usual" and the purpose of the conference is to bring together students and professionals from all disciplines to discuss and develop strategies to reach the Millennium Development Goals.

If you are not familiar with the MDGs, they are a set of 8 health, welfare and environmental sustainability goals set by the United Nations in the year 2000 and are aimed at improving the lives of the world's poorest by improving issues related to education, poverty, public health and environmental degradation. Most of the worlds' governments have pledged to supporting these goals, but are falling short in delivering on that promise. In order to move towards them innovative strategies must be developed.

We are calling for student poster or oral presentations - abstracts are due November 30th - see the attached guidlines. This is a 250 word abstract for either a poster or 10-minute presentation. Your ideas do not have to be tested and proven, we're looking for new, innovative strategies. Take a look at the list of the MDG and their targets and I think you'll see a lot that economic students would be interested in. Ideas I can think of off hand are providing micro-loans for small businesses, balancing economic growth with environmental conservation,and dealing with debt problems in developing nations. "


I know that many of you could offer new thinking on these topics, and I plan to propose a talk for the conference as well. If any of you have any questions about this conference or wish to get the application, you can email the Econ Society at gmueconsociety@gmail.com or email Midego Inc at sara@midego.com .