Rosario Dawson Fails To Understand Rational Abstention

This CNN op-ed by Rosario Dawson seeks to persuade disenfranchised minority citizens to vote in this November's gubernatorial and mayoral elections by appealing to several unconvincing justifications for voting. Dawson appeals to a sense of civic duty, as "voting is the bedrock of our democracy” and a means for citizens to “take ownership of [their] communities.” However, such appeals are ineffective, as voter abstention and rational ignorance are both sensible consequences of the American democratic structure.

Dawson suggests "voting is the easiest way to make your opinion known on any issue,” yet disenfranchised voters are not moved to vote by utility gains, social pressure, or a sense of ‘civic duty’ to overcome the cost of voting and make it to the polls. A rational voter will only vote when his marginal benefit exceeds his marginal costs. The marginal costs for voters, particularly the lower-income minorities that this article targets, will be relatively high, in terms of lost wages or the opportunity cost of taking the time to educate oneself on important issues. In some locales, the marginal cost is even higher due to restrictive photo ID laws, limited voting locations and hours, and tedious paperwork. While the National Voter Registration Day initiative alleviates the cost of the paperwork, the costs will still exceed the expected marginal benefit derived from voting. The probability of a vote being decisive is extremely low, so that even if the magnitude of the value gained from electing a preferred representative is very high, the expected marginal benefit of the average disenfranchised voter will be negligibly low.  

Instead of appealing to a sense of civic duty, Dawson’s campaign would be more effective if it focused on making voting costless or increasing the social pressure on those who do not vote.