None of the Above A voting innovation whose time has come
by Freethinker Bob
"NOTA voting options on ballots would give a much-needed alternative choice to voters in Michigan and, perhaps, even encourage voter turnout. Citizens wouldn't feel so compelled to shirk their voting right, because typically, as is the case now, they can only vote for the 'evil of two lessers.'"
A "none of the above" option should be added to ballots.
With the presidential caucus and primary season in full-swing [actually, at the time of posting this article, the primaries are decided] and elections forthcoming in the fall, Michigan voters can really benefit from a "none of the above" (NOTA) voting option on their ballots.
For too long now, those who go to the polls—and those wishing to go but don't for lack of better candidates—have been unable to withhold their vote for candidates, ballot initiatives, referendums and questions, and have it still count for something.
When voters see candidates as being unsuitable or unworthy of a vote, they must either forego their conscience and choose a candidate they don't want, or forego their right to vote altogether.
The same holds true with ballot questions. Voters must either choose, for example, "yes" or "no," or not have their abstaining, or withheld "vote," officially counted. Being able to withhold consent for a candidate or ballot question is just as important a facet in representative democracy voting as the giving of consent, which ultimately elects a candidate or passes/fails a ballot question.
There are two types of none-of-the-above voting options: binding and non-binding. With binding, if NOTA receives more votes than the candidates or ballot questions, either a new election is ordered or the office goes unfilled. In the case of non-binding, if NOTA wins, it is merely symbolic.
In both instances, it sends a strong message to the previously running parties and their NOTA-defeated candidates: Run better people, or you will keep losing to "none of the above."
A NOTA on Michigan ballots is not as far-fetched as some would think. In 1995, House Bill No. 4794 was introduced by six state representatives but unfortunately never made it past its first committee. In Nevada, a non-binding NOTA voting option has been in place since 1975, and in the 2000 presidential race was utilized by approximately 2 percent of that state's voters.
NOTA voting options on ballots would give a much-needed alternative choice to voters in Michigan and, perhaps, even encourage voter turnout. Citizens wouldn't feel so compelled to shirk their voting right, because typically, as is the case now, they can only vote for the "evil of two lessers."
Additionally, since writing-in candidates who aren't registered prior to the election, and having it officially tabulated by the Secretary of State, is no longer permitted in Michigan, NOTA is needed now more than ever.
A NOTA option on ballots could also encourage higher voter turnout in the traditionally underrepresented 18-to-25-year-old demographic, because young adults could actually vote for something instead of against, or not at all. In addition, the message would resonate: If you don't like the candidates, don't not vote as a means of protest—vote NOTA.
It might also be pointed out that in states where ballot access requirements are particularly difficult for third-party and independent parties, and their subsequent candidates, a NOTA voting option offers an alternative to casting a ballot for Democrats and Republicans. After all, why should voters be given only two candidates who often are ideologically very similar? When variety on the ballot isn't permitted or achievable, NOTA provides a relevant, electorally refreshing "out."
Despite the fact that none-of-the-above voting doesn't typically come up in discussions about American electoral reform, it is a worthwhile endeavor that would really benefit voters whether they choose to use the option or not. Until legislators give their constituents the opportunity to do this, however, voters will just have to keep voting for candidates they dislike—or follow the majority and not vote at all.
Editor's Note: the Libertarian Party implemented the None of the Above voting option from its inception, the premise is fulfilled in its bylaws and (I think) even in the national party platform. Most of the Libertarian Party state and local affiliates have also implemented NOTA. "In all Libertarian elections None of the Above is always a candidate. We recognize that sometimes all of the choices are so bad that you need a way to register that disapproval without having to vote for the lesser of two or more evils."[2]
