Logrolling
When many issues are before a legislative body at the same time, the outcome most preferred by voters on some issues may not result. This failure is due to politicians trading favors, sometimes referred to as “logrolling.” Logrolling is a form of exchange in which politicians trade support on one issue for support on another issue. If a legislator logrolls, he or she trades votes on one bill or act in order to secure votes for another bill or act. It is the direct exchange of support. The senator from Oklahoma votes for the military base in South Carolina in exchange for a vote by the senator from South Carolina for the water project that will make Tulsa a seaport.
The combination of geographically based representative democracy and logrolling promotes overspending. This excess spending results because citizens see the cost of their local projects being shifted to citizens of other states or districts and reward their elected officials for delivering such projects. Since most representatives attempt to be successful at this political game, logrolling creates larger-than-desired levels of government spending.
Policy Focus: Why Are Voter Turnouts So Low?
When election time rolls around, voters are bombarded with commercials and e-mails concerning their civic responsibility to vote. These statements are often accompanied by complaints about low voter turnouts for U.S. elections. You may even be told by your local newspaper’s editorial writer that “if you don’t vote, you can’t complain.”
But think about it rationally for a minute. What are the costs of voting? You must register to vote. You must spend time getting to the polls or filling out and mailing an absentee ballot. Most importantly, you must spend time becoming informed on the issues and the candidates. What are the benefits of voting? It is possible that you might be able to affect the outcome, but the probability of your vote being important is tiny, especially in national elections. Perhaps you vote because you get a feeling that you have done your duty, or you receive satisfaction from participating in civic affairs. These feelings must be important, or even fewer people would vote. This is a consumption motivation for voting. If we really wanted more people to vote, we would need to make it less costly to vote. In Europe most countries vote on Sundays. Some states make election day a legal holiday to encourage voting. It’s not clear whether this increases or decreases the cost of voting! If you don’t think costs affect turnout, answer this question: Do more people vote when the weather is nice or when it is bad?
How could the cost of voting be lowered or the benefits increased? Some methods are postcard registration, transportation to the polls, and more voting places so that lines are shorter. In 2003 Texas introduced what it calls “no excuse voting.” All Texas counties are required to begin early voting 17 days before an election. Texans can stop in anytime during this time and cast their vote. Early voting is certainly more convenient, which should greatly reduce the cost of voting. There was a slight increase in voter turnout in 2004, but the overall trend since early voting in Texas began has revealed no dramatic increase in voter turnout. More convenient does not necessarily translate into more voters (Progressive States Network, n.d.).