It seems there are some things you can always count on. One of them is that when there’s a so-called off-year election in these parts, about one-quarter of eligible voters will take part.
There may be comfort in familiarity much of the time, but we do wish it were possible to change this trend.
The elections for municipal, school board, county and court positions are of utmost importance. We often argue that these races have a far greater impact on people’s lives than the ones that decide who gets to serve in Washington and Harrisburg. Voters feel otherwise.
About 28% of registered voters turned out for Tuesday’s election in Berks County, a slight increase over the 27% in the comparable election of 2017.
If ever there were a year when it seemed possible to break the low-turnout trend, it was this one.
For months news and social media have been dominated by fierce debates at school board meetings here and around the country on issues such as COVID-19 pandemic restrictions and how subjects concerning race are taught. And in this area some municipalities have been embroiled in heated discussions about proposed developments unpopular with many residents. Interest in local politics is about as high as it can be. Yet the numbers barely budged.
A closer look at the situation is required to understand exactly what went on this year. Voters did turn out in fairly impressive numbers in the areas with the most spirited campaigns, but not so much in others.
Most notable was the turnout in Reading, by far the largest municipality in Berks. A mere 9.5% of voters took part in Tuesday’s election there. That certainly dragged down the turnout percentage for the county as a whole.
While we’ve often bemoaned the lack of electoral participation in Reading, a look at Tuesday’s ballot there makes it somewhat understandable. The only local contested races in Reading were for county coroner, a single City Council seat and positions on the bench in state courts. We can talk all day about why these elections are important, but reality tells us that they’re not particularly enticing for voters.
A lack of contested races is a serious problem no matter one’s political affiliation.
With so few people voting in the Democratic stronghold of Reading and so many voters abandoning the once common practice of ticket splitting, there’s less competition in countywide elections. Republicans ran unopposed in two of the three Berks row-office races. Next year District Attorney John Adams and Commissioner Kevin Barnhardt will be the only Democrats holding county elected office, and one of them occupies a seat reserved for a member of his party.
One can make a persuasive argument that county row officers such as prothonotary and treasurer should be appointed rather than elected, but as long as the current system is in effect, it would be better for voters to have a choice.
And it must be noted that this situation that favors Republicans on the county level is beneficial to Democrats seeking office in Reading. Many general elections in the city are unopposed because Republicans don’t want to take on the daunting task of running in a community that last elected a GOP mayor a quarter-century ago.
This is unfortunate all around. It’s always better to have serious political competition, which encourages officeholders to serve the interest of the broader community and avoid complacency.
As long as there’s single-party dominance in communities and successful cross-filing in school board and judicial races, many voters will be left with limited choices.
There will continue to be local elections in odd-numbered years, regardless of how much people pay attention to them. The best we can hope for is that pleas for greater participation are heard by more people. More participation should encourage more competition.
Source: Berkshire mont
Be First to Comment