It’s easy to be cynical about politics and elections. You may have voted for someone who didn’t win. Or you voted for someone who won, but she started making policy contrary to campaign promises. The influence of money on political decision-making can be depressing — both on the national level and locally. People with money have power. No one doubts that.
It’s also true that people who vote have power. We, the members of the Santa Barbara Clean Elections Working Group, want voters to exercise that power whenever they can. That’s why we are promoting Measure A, which would shift the city’s elections from odd-numbered to even-numbered years, enabling more people to go to the polls. State and federal issues, such as the presidential election, are on the even-year ballot, and many people find those more exciting. Historical data provided by the county Elections Office reveal that voter turnout is 1.8 times greater during even-year elections.
Why not make it easier and more convenient for people to vote in City of Santa Barbara elections? Democracy would be served — and our cynicism abated — if more voters participated in their government. Politicians would have to work harder if more people were paying attention. They would be forced to be more responsive if more residents had a stake in what happens in their city. They might keep their promises and carefully weigh how their actions affect all members of the community.
Another positive outcome of Measure A is it would save taxpayer dollars. The city is now running its own elections at a cost of about $280,000 per election. Measure A would move the election to even years when the County of Santa Barbara would run the election, saving an estimated $35,000.
Additionally, voters would be spared the annual barrage of campaign materials clogging their mailboxes, as well as political radio and television ads. City of Santa Barbara residents would vote every two years as a result of the consolidation. What could happen in that off year? Our Clean Elections Working Group views this as an opportunity for partisan and nonpartisan organizations to register more voters and to conduct voter education programs.
We refuse to be cynical. We believe people want to vote — they just need to be informed and engaged. We are adamant that voters will not be overwhelmed by a robust ballot that includes City Council elections, state propositions, and federal questions. Voters will have had some breathing room to study issues and learn about candidates. We urge community groups, business associations, and nonprofit organizations — of all political persuasions — to meet the challenge of educating voters.
A word about the main argument made by Measure A opponents: In shifting election cycles, Measure A requires the 2009 election be held in 2010. That means the incumbent members of the City Council would serve an extra year in their terms. Some people don’t like this, probably because they don’t like the current City Council. In response, we ask voters to consider the bigger picture. The benefits of increased voter participation and cost savings to the city budget will manifest for many years to come. Certainly that outweighs the short-sighted concern about the configuration of a single City Council, for a single year.
Finally, the supporters of Measure A are people who have faith in the political process. The ballot argument is signed by Ken Pettit, the former county registrar of voters known for his dedication to rigorous voter outreach; former Santa Barbara mayor Hal Conklin, respected by political conservatives and progressives; attorney Joseph Allen, who works for social justice and civil rights; Santa Barbara Clean Elections Working Group Co-Chair David Pritchett, who serves on various city and county committees and boards; and me, a journalist committed to informing the electorate through radio, television, and print media.
With hope for a vibrant democracy, we urge a yes vote on Measure A.
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
Previous Month


Comments
Discussion Guidelines
Actually, the arguments against Measure A that are being put forward are that more people voting is a bad thing (Gerry DeWitt) and Measure A isn't the ultimate in campaign reform (The Independent). I haven't quite decided which of those arguments is more idiotic.
jqb (anonymous profile)
October 20, 2007 at 1:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment