Low voter turnouts don’t make sense

Congratulations to District 3 Council member Shaneka Nichols, who won reelection walking away Tuesday by garnering 62 votes to her opponent’s 4.

But wait, 62 to 4? That’s it?

It’s difficult to accept that of the hundreds of people who reside in that district only 66 of them thought it was important to show town government that they do care what it does to and for them.

Unfortunately, that’s one aspect of the democratic process that voting-age people everywhere often fail to recognize. Aside from the essential business of the governed getting to decide who will do the governing, voting, and specifically voting totals, demonstrate how much influence a district, town, county or state can bring to bear when issues arise that might affect them.

Although it’s often said that civic involvement and voting is every citizen’s duty in a democratic society, the fact is voting is also an expression of self-interest, because it reflects how people wish to be treated and recognized.

Of course, election results don’t always work out as hoped, but at least participating in the process does give people standing to complain.

The reality is that the low voter turnout that returned Nichols to the council for another four years is not unusual in most small towns where people seem to pay little attention to local government until they want something or are directly affected by its actions.

Two years ago, for instance, Council member Dean Burrell won reelection with 37 votes and in 2016, before Zack Tyndall was elected mayor, he won the District 2 council seat with just 185 votes in a fairly competitive contest.

These kinds of turnouts aren’t going to make elected officials stand up and take notice or contemplate their political futures during the decision-making process. Voting totals are a show of strength. Not voting is like leaving the keys in the car and hoping whoever takes it doesn’t crash it.