Maybe we simply don’t have enough reasons to vote.  Luckily, the Independent Voter Network has prepared a list of 50 reasons why you should vote.  Here are our ten favorite:

1. To honor Founding Father Benjamin Franklin’s challenge to us all.

Following the close of the Constitutional Convention, he was asked “What have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” He answered, “A republic, if you can keep it!”

2. So you can complain with integrity.

“Elections belong to the people. It’s their decision. If they decide to turn their back on the people and burn their behinds, then they will have to sit on their blisters.” – Abraham Lincoln

3. Because “Taxation without representation is tyranny.” – James Otis

4. For the anticipation of seeing who wins!

5. For the 38,159 missing in action, awaiting a return home to their nation of equality, justice, and freedom.

6. Because you have researched your candidates and can make an informed vote

7. If you don’t vote for your own interests, who will?

8. Because “Apathy gets you the government we have today.” – Gil Sery

9. “You can vote for yourself, or someone you really like.” – Dillon McHugh

10. “Because the rest of us are depending on you.” – Marv DeBoy

If you need even more reasons to vote, check out the full list here. 

The truth is democracy can’t function if almost half of citizens aren’t voting; and, in this regard, Follow My Vote is striving to restore the democratic tradition.  Sign up to support Follow My Vote  in our push for secure end-to-end verifiable mobile voting in the United States.

And please, don’t disappoint Benjamin Franklin.  Exercise your right to vote!

About the author: Jess Kersey is Follow My Vote’s Data Scientist.  Her personal reason to vote is no. 2 on this list – so she can complain with integrity!

The post 10 Reasons To Vote appeared first on Follow My Vote.

North Carolina

Voters in the Tar Heel state were subjected to some of the harshest electoral laws in the country, which eliminated seven early voting days and same-day registration, and prohibited voters from voting outside of their home precincts

Although these new laws made voting less convenient across the board, Black voters, who are historically much more likely to take advantage of early voting, suffered the most.  

In 2012, 700,00 voted during [the early voting days], including more than a quarter of all African-Americans who voted that year.  In 2012, 100,000 North Carolinians, almost a one-third of whom were African-American, voted using same-day registration, which was not available this year. And 7,500 voters cast their ballots outside of their home precincts that year.

The year the laws were enacted, state house speaker Thom Tillis beat Senator Kay Hagen by roughly 48,000 votes, a margin of 1.7 percent.  Ironically, Tillis helped to craft the very same voting restrictions that may have guaranteed him the win.

Kansas

Just before the 2012 elections, new laws in Kansas made two major changes by implementing a strict photo ID law and requiring documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration.

The results? More than 24,000 Kansans were “held in suspense” due to their failure to present the now-necessary proof of citizenship, and were not able to successfully register to vote. Overall Kansas voter turnout dropped 2 percent in 2012.  Many voters were unable to cast their ballots because they did not have a government-issued photo ID that was accepted under the new laws.

In another close election, incumbent Governor Sam Brownback triumphed over adversary Paul Davis by a 2.8 percent margin, or 33,000 votes.    

Virginia

Virginians too faced stringent new photo ID laws in 2012 that impacted elections.  

According to the Virginia Board of Elections, 198,000 “active Virginia voters” did not have acceptable IDs this year.

While the data is not yet available, if national averages hold, the photo ID laws would have accounted for a decrease in voter turnout of 2.4 percent, which equates to 52,000 Virginians.  

Remarkably, Senator Mark Warner came away with a win over Ed Gillespie by a mere 0.6 percent margin, or 12,000 votes. In other words, if only 6 percent of those Virginians that were unable to vote due to the new laws had voted against Warner, Gillespie would have secured the win.

Florida Florida recently implemented what is arguably the most extreme of all in the wave of new voting restrictions.  

Perhaps the most significant for this election was a decision by Scott and his clemency board to make it virtually impossible for the more than 1.3 million Floridians who were formerly convicted of crimes but have done their time and paid their debt to society to have their voting rights restored.

According to a joint study by the Human Rights Watch and  the Sentencing Project, the new laws meant that one in three Black Floridians was, for all intents and purposes, permanently disenfranchised.   In the gubernatorial election, Rick Scott beat out former Governor Charlie Crist by just 72,000 votes.

Ironically, Scott had rolled back rights that were expanded under Governor Crist, who had established a path for people with past convictions to more easily get their voting rights restored. Under that process, more than 150,000 citizens had their rights restored before Scott changed the rules.

The post New Voting Restrictions Determine Election Outcomes appeared first on Follow My Vote.

In the United States, we constantly hold elections: Every two years, we elect a new Congress and, in many states, a new legislature.  Every four years, that’s combined with a presidential election.  Some jurisdictions squeeze local balloting – for sheriff, school board, judge, coroner, you name it – into the years between midterm congressional and presidential elections.  Of course, these are often twice-a-year exercises, since a primary precedes the general election.  Some primaries have runoffs!

Switzerland is the world’s closest approximation of a direct democracy, meaning that the people vote directly on policies and other directives.  Direct democracy is said to be the purest form of democracy that puts the maximum amount of power in the hands of the people.  However, like the United States, the Swiss vote more on average, with at least three or four national votes per year in addition to regional elections.  So how low is voter turnout in both countries?

A mere 49.1% of registered Swiss voters cast ballot sin the 2011 parliamentary elections.  That was admittedly higher than the 41.6% rate in the 2010 U.S. midterm election, but both figures were below the rates recorded in other Western European countries, which typically exceed 75% for their less-frequent elections.

To explain the slumping voter turnout, scholars cite what is known as “voter fatigue”.  In theory, frequent elections are designed to maximize the people’s power over the government and to force the voting public to stay informed.  James Madison himself claimed that voting for the House of Representatives every other year would ensure “immediate dependence on, and an intimate sympathy with, the people.”  In practice, however, frequent elections create barriers for those who would like to be active and informed voters but do not have the time or money to do so.

Both President Obama and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton have devised methods of encouraging Americans to vote more, with Obama backing compulsory voting and Clinton basing her platform on reforms for national automatic voter registration.

Regardless of who end up occupying the White House in 2016, it’s clear that changes need to be made.  One solution that is quickly gaining favor is online voting.  The ability to vote remotely lowers transportation and time barriers, and provides a platform for voters to wisely invest their time in learning about the candidates.  What do you think, should we simply vote less to vote more, or should we implement online voting as a solution to low voter turnout?

Read More Here

The post Vote More to Vote Less appeared first on Follow My Vote.

Recently, Tsipras decided to put the power directly in the hands of the people via a national Greek referendum.  Eurozone leaders watched impassively as 60% of Greeks voted against accepting the bailout proposal, and instead to send the negotiators back to the drawing board.  While the outcome of their vote isn’t surprising, how they voted is.

The video shows a group of what are presumed to be poll officials first dumping a box of votes onto a pair of side-by-side tables, and then gathering the votes by hand into ambiguous piles.  This methodology is troubling, as the economic crisis has polarized the Greek people and there are embittered advocates in both the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ camps.  Between the harsh austerity measures which Greeks have labored under for years, and Tsipras’ highly influential campaign for a ‘no’ vote in the Greek referendum, it is not unthinkable that a well-meaning poll worker abused his or her position to unduly influence the vote.  So while investors around the world waited nervously for the outcome of the referendum,  3,558,450 votes were cast and shoddily hand-counted.

This is just one of many situations in which online voting software, like Follow My Vote’s, would have delivered a faster, more trustworthy, and transparent election result and expedited a negotiation process which has been a cause of much anxiety for global investors and spiked volatility in European markets.  Put simply, the fact that such archaic voting methods were used in a decision as important as the Greek referendum underscores the need for more modern voting practices; especially in a globalized world where the decisions of a handful of Greeks affects not only the Greek economy but that of the entire world.

The post Questionable Voting Practices in the Greek Referendum? You Decide. appeared first on Follow My Vote.

But the Pirate Party in one country in particular has exceeded all expectations, with two separate polls currently estimating them to have garnered 35% of the vote.

Iceland’s Píratar party, itself a spin-off of Sweden’s Pirates, has shot up in recent opinion polls, to the extent that, according to two recent surveys, they would even be the most popular party if elections were held today.

Political analysts are still uncertain whether the Pirate’s success in disrupting the status quo is only a phase or represents a more permanent trend. Regardless, their recent electoral popularity is sure to cause some waves in the Icelandic parliament, called Althing, especially in the department of cryptocurrencies.  

One topic of conversation will surely be the legality of cryptocurrencies, as Iceland placed an outright ban on cryptocurrencies late in 2014.  Generally speaking, Pirate Parties are in favor of cryptocurrencies, and the recent success of the Finnish Pirate Party in funding campaigns with Bitcoin will certainly motivate their Icelandic counterparts to bring the cryptocurrency discussion back to the table.

Read more about Iceland’s Pirate Party here. Note: Follow My Vote is a non-partisan organization. We do not endorse any political party.

The post Pirate Party Popularity Explodes In Iceland appeared first on Follow My Vote.