I don't vote.

Rather than ask me why I don't vote, the 'True American Patriots' (TAP's) within my social circle choose to immediately judge me as either being "apathetic", "un-American", "uninformed", "ungrateful" or some combination of thereof.

The reason they do this is exactly why they 'have to' vote and feel everyone else 'has to' vote as well.

They choose to be right.

If I am 'wrong' for not voting - then what are they?

They are right.

It's important for these people to be 'right.' You can observe this by their behavior when faced with someone like me. They launch into long, dramatic pontifications about the importance of voting. Often these monologues will include colorful descriptions of the various inequities suffered by citizens of 3rd world countries and other governments. These antidotes are fodder for the stark comparison between our present system of democracy and "what COULD happen" to us, should we not support that system by voting.

If these other governments are 'wrong' - then what are we?

We are right.

Inevitably - the current singular archetypal figure that arises during the 'TAP' lecture is the image of the solitary Chinese student standing in front of the tank at Tienamen Square. Mythologically speaking, this is the kamikaze-hero archetype - who, despite all odds and at his own peril, risks and ultimately looses his life in the quest for something greater than himself - in this case, democracy.

It is a powerful symbol of our time. The individual who stands-up for what he or she believes in - despite the consequences. We respect and revere the individual who strikes out on their own and leaves the 'tribe-mentality' to seek their own truth, rather than blindly accept the status quo. After all, it was the entrepreneurial spirit that built much of what America is today. The very foundation of Christianity is based on this ideal of martyrdom as well. Shakespeare himself said it best, "To thine own self be true." We admire the courage that is required of such an individual to remain true to their own vision.

Well ... unless their vision and their truth disagrees with our own, then it's another story. Then - they are wrong and what are we?

We are right.

I recently had the pleasure of discovering this during a dinner party in which I was the only one of five people seated at the table who openly acknowledged that I did not vote.
Consequently I then had to sit through the TAP lecture, including but not limited to the Tienamen Square story throughout which I kept thinking to myself, "You know, the only difference between me and that Chinese student right now is that the folks at this table don't have guns…" It was very clear to me that I was 'wrong' and my voting companions were 'right.'

The most comforting thing about a purely dualistic approach to life is that it's consistent and mentally efficient. None of that nasty old 'questioning' or 'considering' to be done. Besides, when it comes to voting - you're going to need all those neurotransmitters to help you sift through the pro and con arguments concerning each electoral issue and candidate, so you can determine which one's are wrong. Because once you know which ones are wrong, what is left?

The one that is right.

And what do we want to be?

We want to be right.

Another old stand-by from the TAP parade of platitudes is my personal favorite: "If you don't vote - you have no right to complain about the government."

Uh-huh. So I guess the 45% of my paycheck that gets unilaterally sucked-out by State and Federal taxes each week should be considered a charitable contribution?

What is silly about this particular ultimatum, is that it is based on the illusion that American voters actually "pick" the winning candidate by majority vote - thereby being responsible for the electoral consequences. I find it ironic that the same people who 'get-out the vote' know so little about how our voting system actually works.

The American system of elections is known as the Single-Member Plurality (SMP) system. Only English-speaking countries employ the SMP system. (The US, Great Britain, etc.) The rules for American elections, under the SMP system, do not require a candidate to obtain a majority of the votes; instead they require the candidate to obtain plurality. Plurality, as it is used here, is defined as getting more votes than any other candidate. Hence, American elections can have the perverse result of a winning candidate who actually had the most voters voting against him or her. It has happened and it looks like this:

Candidate A - gets 43% of the vote and is the most popular
Candidate B - gets 44% of the vote and is the most unpopular
Candidate C gets 10% of the vote
Candidate D gets 3% of the vote

According to this, 56% of the voters voted AGAINST Candidate B - yet B won anyway.

So we have a system in which a candidate can be elected against the wishes of the majority of voters. This alone, points to why many voters feel frustrated and unheard. When combined with the "lesser of two evils" policy of voting, it's enough to prompt most autonomous, thinking individuals to reconsider the TAP program. We are only fooling ourselves to even THINK that a third party candidate could ever win a presidential election. It inevitably comes down to the democrats and the republicans - and let's be honest with ourselves for a moment - when was the last time you actually LIKED or BELIEVED either one of their candidates?

I think past presidential candidate Bob Dole summed it up best when he said, "I wonder sometimes what people are thinking or if they are thinking at all." - Thanks Bob, for once I agree with you completely.

So, if the voters don't actually make the decisions about who runs this country - who does?

Big Business does.

Not the voters, not the politicians, not even the lobbyists who buy the politicians. It takes money to run a country - lots and lots of money and who has all the money?

Big Business.

Large conglomerate corporations, mega-marketed, big-buck spending, zillion dollar business runs this country and don't you ever forget it. Like it or not, your choices were limited long ago by corporate puppeteers and high priced consultants who merely create the illusion that you get to choose. That's why campaigns are basically issue-less when you get down to the real nitty-gritty. Candidates attempt to be all things to all people, carefully avoiding any controversial subjects and obfuscating the issues. In order to win an election a candidate must avoid antagonizing any plurality of the electorate. In reality you, the voter, are only being given a carefully constructed set of options in which all choices ultimately lead to the same end. That end being: more money for Big Business, more tax breaks for Big Business, more land for Big Business, more natural resources for Big Business, more business for Big Business. You see, the apple does not fall far from its tree. Big Business gives money to the lobbyists who buy-off the politicians, who give it back to Big Business.

It's so simple.

Yet - who carries the tax burden for this country?

People like me do. Working middle class, high school educated, shopping at K-Mart kinda folks who are just trying to make ends meet. Most of us, especially in California, can't even afford to own our own homes. We live just a few paychecks away from homelessness on any given day. We live at the mercy of this system -and we KNOW FOR A FACT that it doesn't work because we are caught right smack in the middle of it. Think I'm exaggerating? Check out the numbers.

In a 1996 article from the October/November issue of 'Campaigns and Elections', the following statistics were noted about non-voting Americans:

1. Minorities comprise a larger share of non-voters - up to 30% as opposed to minorities found among voters - 18%

2. People over 45 years old who earn less than $30,000 per year have a negative view of politics and comprise 12% of non-voters.

3. Middle aged people earning more than $30,000 per year who believe their vote doesn't count comprise 18% of non-voters.

4. People over 45 years old earning less than $30,000 per year who choose to ignore politics comprise 14% of non-voters.

5. Young adults under 30 years old earning less than $30,000 per year who dislike government institutions and mistrust the system comprise 27% of non-voters.

6. 55% of non-voters have no more than a high school education.

7. 48% of non-voters have a household income that is less than $30,000 per year.

At the risk of sounding 'right' - I must point out here that there is a direct correlation between who pays the lion's share of this country's taxes and who refuses to vote. Coincidence? I think not. It's just so damn hard to find time to review all those pro's and con's in the voter- information pamphlets they send you while working 60 hours a week and spending another 10 or so hours a week commuting. Maybe they could distribute all that voter-information on cassette tapes so we could listen to it while we're driving to work? Of course that would mean a raise in taxes to cover the added expense.

Never mind.

I began this article by sharing with you that no one ever stops to ask me why I don't vote. So now I'm going to tell you.

It's my right.