Contrary to the RPI elections committee’s ideas, high voter turnout does not signal an effectual democracy; certainly not when voters are paid to vote.

Voters in democracy, ideally, have something at stake. They desire some outcome from their government, and they shape that outcome by selecting the government’s leaders. Each vote represents an endorsement of, and a mandate to, the selected candidate; unless theses votes are cast at RPI.

Then, the purpose of voting is to win a frosted RPI mug that retails for $15. As each candidate struggled to assert with greater vehemence that he, not the others, would change things the most, the practicality and direction of those changes lost prominence. Many students weren’t motivated to vote by the anonymity and outlandish campaign promises of these ambitious candidates, but these students voted anyway.

The fallout from votes cast by voters who are indifferent to the results is an arbitrary student government backed by no one in particular. Each real vote is diluted by the votes of a dozen kids who could use a good mug—and who is to blame them?

The push for voter turnout by the RPI elections committee is indicative of a wider misunderstanding of the significance of high voter turnout. A democracy in which everyone participates, whether they have a stake or not, whether they know the candidates or not, is not a well-functioning democracy. Highlighting such a misconception is GM candidate Robert Otlowski’s comment in The Polytechnic that “the GM should represent all students, especially those that are not active in government.”

Students not active in government are precisely the students that ought not to be represented by that government! It is voters, not the apathetic, that ought to be represented. How does Mr. Otlowski plan to represent these students? Students who don’t vote have given no mandate, and no endorsement to him or to any other candidate. Nor have they called for change.

Knowledgeable and concerned students, not everyone in general, ought to vote. Anyone who needs encouraging to vote does not fit the criteria. Giving away mugs ensures arbitrary results and demonstrates the RPI elections committee’s weak grasp of the principles of democracy.

David McKenna