One of the oft-stated truisms of the American political system is that citizens can express an opinion by choosing to not vote.
Not that we would recommend that course of inaction. After all, it’s not difficult to register. After all, once you register, the ballot arrives in your mailbox. After all, there’s the law that says if you don’t vote you can’t complain about the government. At least I think there is; I might be wrong on that one.
Still, many people choose to express their lack of opinions or lack of interest by not voting. Nearly 50 percent of registered Clark County voters — and about 46 percent statewide — opted to forego voting in this month’s general election. And while that fact typically leads to much hand-wringing and teeth-gnashing from people who like to wring their hands and gnash their teeth about such things, we come here today not to lament the turnout in the election that took place 26 days ago.
No, instead we come to look at some of the other numbers that came out of that election. Those numbers, after all, were deemed official Tuesday, which left the process 14 days shy of the record set in 2000 by Bush v. Gore.
There is a saying in the sports world that goes like this: “Scoreboard” — meaning all that really matters is the final result. And while that also applies in elections, there are some interesting underlying story lines in this year’s Clark County election.
Take the undervote, for example. An undervote is counted when somebody turns in a ballot but does not choose a side in a particular race. For example, among the 126,243 ballots cast in the county, 14,042 people declined to express an opinion on statewide Advisory Vote No. 9. Considering that the question involved “Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1287,” this undervote is understandable; the measure was every bit as confusing as its title.
County charter undervote
But what is less understandable is the fact that 6,773 Clark County voters declined to choose a side on the home rule charter. Seriously. Despite being the most discussed, most debated, most divisive issue on the ballot, 5.4 percent of the people who voted on one thing or another in Clark County declined to say “yay” or “nay” on the charter.
Now, before David Madore takes this ball and runs with it, let’s make one thing clear — if all 6,773 undervotes had been turned into votes against the charter, the “yes” votes still would have been in the majority. But the fact that so many kept silent on the issue seems odd.
Maybe not as odd as Clark County voters approving both Initiative 591 and Initiative 594, which were incompatible gun-control measures. I-591 was defeated statewide while I-594 was approved, preventing a fascinating court battle between the two.
Maybe not as curious as 6,628 voters choosing to not participate in the County Commissioner race between Jeanne Stewart and Craig Pridemore. That, in theory, could have been enough to swing the race, which Stewart won by 905 votes.
And maybe not as curious as the undervote of 8,078 in the County Treasurer race, which also could have turned Doug Lasher’s victory into a loss against Lauren Colas.
But the county charter undervote is curious nonetheless — kind of the local equivalent of turning in a ballot during a presidential election but not voting for president.
Undoubtedly, the charter proposal could be confusing without a bit of examination. There were, out of necessity, a lot of parts involved, and the freeholders who designed it are to be commended for addressing the issues effectively and as clearly as possible.
It was because of those various pieces that I figured the charter would not pass. It was one of those items where voters could find one or two issues they didn’t like and reject the proposal in its entirety. They didn’t, and Clark County will be better for it.
Even if plenty of people chose to make a statement by not voting.
