With ASLC elections just around the corner, I often hear of Linfield’s low student-turnout rate in past elections.
Whenever we hear about low voter turnout rates, whether it’s in our American government textbooks or on the evening news, it is always painted as a terrible epidemic in America. We are often told that those who do not vote feel that their votes will not make a difference.
I believe that voting makes a difference, but the significance of that difference is debatable.
In regards to last year’s ASLC elections, it seems that voting certainly made a difference, as evidenced by senior Ashlee Carter’s two-vote victory.
If this is the case, though, then not voting makes just as much of a difference as voting does.
Not voting need not always be linked so closely to voter apathy; it can also be the result of an informed decision.
Whether people vote or abstain, I just want their decisions to be made based on informed, reasonable analysis. If you have the ability to put someone in power, you should try to make the best decision possible. This involves looking at and evaluating every candidate. You should vote for the candidate who best reflects your views.
If no candidate reflects your views, then you are perfectly justified in deciding not to vote.
Also, and I think this applies to our ASLC elections, if you don’t know anything or only know a little about the candidates, then you probably shouldn’t be voting. Uninformed people just aren’t the best decision makers.
The problem with the ASLC elections is that they seem pretty quick-and-dirty, especially this year. How many students actually know anything about the candidates? There certainly was not a large percentage of the campus at the first debate March 1.
Besides this, students can rely on fliers and the next (and final) debate for information on candidates.
These debates, however, are not widely publicized. Out of the flurry of campus-wide e-mails we receive, you would think there would be at least one encouraging students to go to these debates.
Linfield students in general do not seem to take ASLC elections seriously, as shown by only three official (and one write-in) candidates running for office. I doubt many students will learn much about these candidates before election day, so I won’t be shocked if we have a low voter turnout. Who’s going to vote for a candidate that he or she knows nothing about?
I’m sure many students might also feel that it does not matter who wins this election. Students may think the candidates are all the same. The candidates all certainly seemed like an agreeable bunch at the last debate.
Then again, there aren’t many highly divisive issues on campus. The biggest one I can think of is Trayless Tuesdays, and I don’t think ASLC officers will have much to do with that.
Voting for someone based on his or her personality is deplorable to me, but I feel this is what many students will end up doing since it’s the only thing that actually seems to be different about the candidates and because students won’t know much else about them. Maybe it’s not a big deal, though. I’m sure all the candidates will work hard at their positions, if elected. That’s all you can really expect from an ASLC candidate, right? So, what more is there to debate?
These are just the impressions I’m getting of ASLC elections as a first-year student and from knowing a little about past campus elections. Currently, they seem like a bit of a joke. While this may not be much of a problem here at Linfield, I hope this line of thinking does not carry over into the voting habits of students in elections outside of school. Voting for an ASLC presidential candidate and an actual presidential candidate based on their personalities have vastly different consequences.

Braden Smith, Opinion editor
Braden Smith can be reached at [email protected]