Diversifying the Government and its effects on voter turnout

For my blog post I will be referencing the Katherine Tate reading “Black Faces in the Mirror”. She begins the chapter we read discussing the Congressional Black Caucus and the growing number of African Americans being elected and representing in Congress. As a country, we are seeing a steady increase in the number of minorities and women being elected to serve our country in politics which is very good. Tate discusses however, that there is a proportional misrepresentation of blacks in government. While there have been tremendous strides towards closing the gap between affluent white men in politics to allowing for more diversity, we are still falling short of equal representation as a nation. Tate also recognizes that Black policy makers are just as effective as their white counterparts in bill attainment however there is a stigma surrounding black policy makers as not being so successful because of their more liberal agenda. This stigma needs to be erased because it is untrue. Furthermore, “black legislators provide black constituents with the greatest amount of ‘symbolic’ representation, but also initiate and participate in providing their black constituents with policies of substance” (Katherine Tate, 175). This idea is what I found most important and relevant in the most recent election period.

This past election period has brought so much diversity to the government in many states. For example, Virginia elected its first trans woman to state legislature and she has beat the same man who attempted to pass legislation that would not allow transgenders to use the bathrooms they wished to use. This made news everywhere and is viewed as a historical event, rightfully so. This type of election opens up many doors for more minorities to run for offices across the country. It not only opens up doors for more minorities to run for offices but it increases voter turnout rates amongst a large population of people who typically do not vote. When people feel that they can really relate to a candidate because they represent them symbolically as Tate put it, they are more likely to vote for them because they feel like their voices will really be heard. A lot of time minorities and the poor don’t vote in huge turnouts because they feel like no matter who they vote for, Democrat or Republican, neither party will really cater to their needs as citizens so they find voting pointless. This attitude surrounding elections and who even runs for offices deeply needs to be changed in our country because we have one of the lowest voting turnouts in the world even though we consistently preach about free and fair elections as defining sovereignty.

5 Responses to "Diversifying the Government and its effects on voter turnout"

Esteban Lara says:

November 18, 2017 at 11:58 pm

This is an interesting post. I believe that people definitely feel more comfortable and motivated to vote because if somebody doesn’t think their opinion matters or makes a difference, then there’s no real reason for them to express that opinion. The good thing about democracy is that people can truly, reliably, provide and express their own points of view. In this post you provide an interesting example of the growing minority populations electing government officials to represent them.
Kevin Todd says:

November 20, 2017 at 12:02 am

I think you bring up very interesting and relevant points in your argument. I agree and think it is important for candidates who can relate to those who have typically not voted in the post elections is crucial for our nation’s progress in becoming more diverse in voting. I think it is a problem how less people vote and voice their opinions each year. This country needs to figure out a more impactful way to get their messages across through representatives to the public which could bring out higher proportions in voting. I think it is good that more people are entering politics reflecting those who have not voted in the past because hopefully it will cause those who generally havent voted to vote since they can trust their candidates.
Marcin Jerzewski says:

November 20, 2017 at 3:14 am

Your post is an important voice in the discussion about the representation of minorities in the U.S. Federal government, as well as the public perceptions of minority lawmakers. I really enjoyed reading it. An issue which I find particularly important in contemporary American politics is the issue of “taxation without representation,” in particular with regard to U.S. unincorporated territories. Even though residents of these territories are U.S. citizens just like inhabitants of the 50 states, they do not have the same representation in federal government, and yet they still have to fulfil some of the same duties towards the United States as other citizens. They are only represented by non-voting delegates to the House of Representatives, who participate in the discussions, but cannot vote. Considering that these territories are predominantly inhabited by representatives of various ethnic minorities, I believe that the issue of their representation in the federal government is strongly linked to the perception of minority legislators which you discuss. There are currently six non-voting at-large congressional districts: (1) American Samoa, (2) US Virgin Islands, (3) District of Columbia, (4) Guam, (5) Puerto Rico, and (6) Northern Mariana Islands. Now, consider the predominant ethnic groups in each of these six districts: American Samoa – over 90% Pacific Islander, USVI – 76.2% Black, DC – 50.1% Black, Guam – over 1/3 Chamorro, around 1/4 Asian, Puerto Rico – 80.5% Latinx/Hispanic, and Northern Mariana Islands – 50% Asian and 34.9% Pacific Islander (data on ethnicity from NationalAtlas.gov). Except for Guam (represented by Madeleine Bordallo, a Caucasian woman), all these districts are represented with a House by a person who belongs to the predominant ethnic group in the territory. Perhaps their presence in the House and the inability to actually vote also contributes to the stigma surrounding policymakers of color.
Alexandra Friedman says:

November 21, 2017 at 6:06 pm

I thought you brought up some really good points in the need for diversity in our government. While we have made a lot of progress, obviously including electing our first African american president, we still have a long way to go. As we have learned, people with similar demographics tend to have repeating views. Because our government is made up of primarily white males, their views are usually the ones reflected in policy. For example (in 2013), the supreme court was 78% white and 66% male. This obviously and inherently plays a role in their decisions simply because of their background culture and socialization. Even if they are supposed to be impartial voices of judgement, they cannot erase their past. In terms of state governors, only 10% are women and 10% colored. These numbers are staggering; these people who are supposed to represent everyone tend to all be the same. Because of this, i think you are correct in saying that our tendencies need to change in electing officials. Until then, congress will be less effective and not fully represent our people.
1. Ernest McGowen says:
  
  November 29, 2017 at 9:54 pm
  
  I think “people of color” is a more appropriate term

Comments are closed.