It was November 2016. The presidential contest between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump had concluded and vote tabulations were complete. The nation was stunned to learn that Donald Trump had won. It seemed Trump himself was stunned. He bested Clinton in the electoral college by winning three swing states, and won those states by some 75,000 votes.

 

Being a political reporter, I delved into the election statistics to learn more. The data was alarming. Two in five eligible voters hadn’t cast a legal ballot.  

 

In 2017, I drove across the country to talk to nonvoters and figure out why they disengaged, or had never engaged. I reasoned that there had to be solutions to increase turnout. The U.S. would never go for mandated voting, as some countries – Argentina, Australia, and Belgium among them – have instituted. But once I found the reasons people were skipping elections, perhaps I could figure out how to persuade them to vote.

 

I started my voyage in New Hampshire at a meeting of the President Trump’s Election Integrity Commission. It was here that both Republicans and Democrats were convening to discuss voter fraud in 2016. Very little evidence was produced, one case here and one case there, and it was no surprise that the committee was disbanded pretty quickly thereafter, amid Democrats on the committee complaining that they were being shut out. It was all very fishy, but I did learn something very important at that meeting. I had been thinking that allowing people to vote on their phones or laptops would make the process so easy that more people would do it. At the meeting, however, an expert presented the cold hard truth that anything electronic could not only be hacked, it was so insecure it could be hacked by a kid. The idea that we’d ever vote from home on our personal devices was dead on arrival. 

 

I went to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, where I happened to eat dinner next to a mother and teenage son. I told them I was trying to figure out why so many people hadn’t voted in the last election, and the son said, “conspiracy theories.” He told me some of the more outlandish ones he had heard, and explained to me how fast and how widely they had spread. Hillary Clinton is gravely ill. Democrats are pedophiles. And on and on. At the time, I listened attentively but completely dismissed this as having much impact on turnout. Later, I’d reconsider. Trump had won Pennsylvania by a pittance, a margin of just over 44,000 votes. More than 6 million Pennsylvanians had voted, and the winner was determined by less than half of the number of people who fill the football stadium at Penn State. Remarkable. Every vote mattered, and some were probably spooked out of voting.

 

I also visited a campaign event for a woman who was running for Congress, but the district lines were held up in court and couldn’t been finalized yet, even though the election was just months away. I learned how that can effect a race, as she campaigned all over town but was uncertain exactly which areas and which constituents she was vying to represent, and they were vastly different. Further, if certain areas were included in her district, she’d have a harder time winning because they may have had a strong contender already and be unfamiliar with her. The uncertainty threw a big wrench in the race. Maybe that was the aim of her opponents.

 

A friend urged me to visit Youngstown, Ohio, where her grandparents once owned an impressive family home. Now large hilltop houses with impressive front lawns were going for rock bottom prices, and old trucks sat in the driveways. When I talked to people there, they were still souring from Bill Clinton’s North American Free Trade Agreement that took effect in 1994. Not only were the well-paying manufacturing jobs moved to Mexico, workers here had to teach the Mexicans how to do the jobs just before they were laid off. The city had never recovered economically or emotionally. There was a loyal Democratic following, but now voters were torn, with Clinton’s wife heading their party’s ticket, and the Republican candidate speaking their language and promising to stand up for them. I could understand them being torn.

 

In Madison, Wisconsin, I went to a talk by an Atlantic reporter who offered evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 election. I asked the reporter, “Isn’t it true that the United States meddles or has meddled in the elections of other countries?” Oh yes, he said, but it was not okay that Russia had meddled in ours. Russia had sent out targeted disinformation on social media intending to divide us, and it worked. 

 

I camped out on the sidewalk to gain entrance the following morning to the Supreme Court hearing on Gill vs Whitford, a Wisconsin gerrymandering case in which the district maps were challenged for being partisan. A woman camping out ahead of me on the sidewalk explained that her father was a state legislator and to curtail his power Republicans had drawn district lines that swerved around his house. Another person I met on the sidewalk, David Daley, had written a book detailing the REDMAP plan. I bought it the next day. Ratf**ked: The True Story Behind the Secret Plan to Steal America's Democracy is fascinating and disturbing. Republicans beefed up efforts to win sleepy state legislative races before the 2010 Census so they could draw the new maps (maps are drawn after each new Census, which is every 10 years) and win for a decade. It worked. They didn’t even have to spend a lot to do it because there wasn’t much attention on those races.

 

Once inside the Supreme Court, I observed the Justices behind their long, imposing bench on a raised platform, and I watched the presenting lawyers make their arguments to the famous nine. I will never forget Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the diminutive justice who could barely be seen over the bench, stating that if the court didn’t intervene, partisan gerrymanders would create a disincentive to vote among those not favored in the district maps. In other words, if the district lines determined the outcome, why vote? Later, this case would be tossed back to the lower courts, and district maps would continue to be challenged in courts for partisanship. I learned that several states now have commissions draw maps, and some of these commissions are even made up of non-politicians. It seems more fair than having district maps drawn by state legislators, effectively handing the task to the majority party with a vested interest to help their own. Congressional and state legislative district maps are in place for a decade, after all, and when the majority party draws maps that favor their party, they can become entrenched. Republicans and Democrats have both been accused of making the maps too partisan.

 

After listening to the Wisconsin gerrymandering case, I walked down the Supreme Court steps. There was Arnold Schwarzenegger, the bodybuilder and movie star and former Republican governor of California, standing at a podium in front of a small crowd, declaring that politicians should not be allowed to choose their voters. I loved watching this Republican politician do the right thing, even though it was leaders in his own party who had drawn the partisan maps. I also loved watching people listen, join in, or just show they cared. It’s our country. The least we can do is care.

 

I drove South. In Tennessee, I met people who said they didn’t vote because it was no use. The state was “red.” If they were Republican they thought their vote wasn’t needed and if they were Democratic or a swing voter, they thought it was futile. Meanwhile, half of Tennessee didn’t vote, and the results could easily have gone another way if more people voted. I realized the “red” label is a reflection of past voting – how the state voted in the last presidential election, and which party won the top three offices in the state – and could have no bearing on the present or future, but that voters and would-be voters may not realize that. The media should stop labeling states “red” and “blue.” It convinces people to stay home.

 

I knew I needed to go to Texas. With one of the highest electoral vote counts in the country, Texas was integral to presidential elections. The margin between Trump and Clinton was just over 800,000 votes, while more than 8 million eligible voters failed to cast a legal ballot. Virtually half of eligible Texans hadn’t voted. What I found there was remarkable. I went to the largest mosque in Houston. They were hosting a family festival, and I was able to walk around and talk to people. They had attracted 15,000 people to their Ramadan event that year, and only 15 people to meet and listen to candidates for political office. I deduced that most were immigrants, they were a tightknit community, and they kept to themselves. They didn’t feel completely comfortable in the greater city, and they made an effort not to engage with government entities out of fear.

 

Others in Houston were fearful as well. Latinx are not a unified group. Some didn’t even speak Spanish and seemed fully integrated. Some had undocumented family members at home and worried that poll workers would follow them home and call ICE.  New voter ID laws were enforced unevenly, laws kept changing as lawsuits were brought, and signs at polling places about voter ID requirements were sometimes be out of date. There were definite shenanigans going on to keep likely Democrats from voting.

 

Some non-voters felt that their vote wouldn’t have counted. That no matter who was elected from whatever political party, there was so much corruption and whoever won would have no concern for them. I learned that many Texans left home countries where they felt that this was particularly true, and they just assumed it was the same in the U.S.

 

I also spoke to a college student who insisted that their professor at Rice University told the class their votes didn’t matter because of the electoral college, so why bother. Did this student misunderstand? Did the whole class believe this? And tell their friends?

 

I spoke to a younger man outside his home with a pile of soaking wet furniture. He was waiting for FEMA to come and inspect his flooded home and provide assistance. Nevertheless, he told me he didn’t vote because he was apolitical. “I don’t do politics,” he said.

 

In January, 2018, I made it to Utah in time for the Sundance Film Festival where the film Dark Money was premiering. I had already read Jane Mayer’s book, but this movie was solely about Montana and the state’s success at driving out dark money. A friend in DC connected me with Ann Ravel who had resigned from the Federal Election Commission the year before, after four years and a Chairmanship, and we saw the movie together.  Of course dark money influences politics, but it’s actually insidious. The groups that receive this money typically run ads or send mailers to infuse very negative associations for opponents of the candidate they support – sometimes startlingly outrageous claims - while keeping the donors who pay for the ads anonymous. Whatever their aim for running fear-mongering ads, the public has a right to know, and yet we don’t because of a 2010 Supreme Court decision, Citizens United, which made anonymous donations legal. Congress can create a law to keep dark money out, and bills have passed the House but didn’t make it into law. Why would elected officials stop this? They are the beneficiaries.

 

I spoke with people in Montana, Arizona, California, and I kept hearing the same things from non-voters. People believe their vote doesn’t matter. Either they believe the election is already decided because they live in a “red” state or a “blue” state, or because of gerrymandering (which doesn’t come into play in statewide elections such as President, Senator, or Governor), or they heard that the election was rigged so why bother voting? Some also believe that elections nowadays are contests between crooked politicians on all sides who don’t care about them anyway. Mass shootings, racial profiling by cops, burdensome student loan debt, illegal immigration – in their view, our government doesn’t seem willing or capable of solving problems.

 

Couple that with the vitriol in politics today. The shouting on cable news programs, the deep divides at family gatherings, the intensity, the mockery, and, of course, all of the misinformation, creates extreme unease and even disgust with politics. Some people would rather sit out. 

 

Hawaii had the lowest turnout rate – only 42 percent of those eligible voted for President in 2016. One of the reasons was its time zone. Sitting five hours behind New York, it felt to Hawaiians watching the news as if the election was over while their polls were still open. (They have since switched to mail voting to increase turnout and it has helped. Voting increased to 55 percent in 2020 – still low but improving.)

 

There were some bright spots along the way. The Texas Organizing Project was one. They approach unlikely voters and ask about their issues and priorities. Say they have a boyfriend in jail and they’d like to see changes in the judicial system. TOP invites them to meetings with DA candidates to ask questions. They are encouraged to vote in the race. And then, if their candidate wins, they are invited with TOP staff to attend the inauguration. But it doesn’t end there. TOP arranges for meetings with the new DA where they can ask questions and press for changes. I appreciated their issue-based approach to turning nonvoters into voters. Everyone personally cares deeply about at least one issue. And I also appreciate that their organizing didn’t stop after the election. 

 

It’s important that people vote, but it doesn’t stop there. More non-voters might engage if they realized that once elected, these office holders work for constituents. They help with constituent services, but also tally up incoming messages from constituents weighing in on any issue. Elected officials can vote any way they want on a bill, but they literally represent the people in their district or state – and constituents literally pay their salary through tax dollars. Office holders are public servants. They need to hear from their constituents. This is a participatory system. You can bet that office holder is hearing from industries and large companies that want a new law that will be profitable to them. And federal office holders are hearing from countries that needs military aid. They must also hear from ordinary citizens who are for or against supplying it.

 

I am also encouraged by new groups popping up to help political novices run for office, organize  registration drives, and drive people to the polls. There are postcard-writing groups employing volunteers to remind people to vote, and groups organizing telathons where volunteers call eligible voters to give them a chance to talk and ask questions, and to encourage them to vote.

 

Further, while I am upset about the many efforts to discourage voting, I am encouraged by countervailing efforts to allow online voter registration, now available in most states, and automatic registration in half of all states when getting a driver’s license or interacting with a specific government agency. Online voter information sites have added a feature so voters can easily check to make sure their registration is active and up to date. Further, nearly half of states now allow same-day voter registration, which is extremely helpful to voters. In recent years, conducting elections by mail-in ballot has increased, with 8 states now employing that. 

 

That leads me to another important point I realized as I driving from state to state. Elections are run by the states, and states make the laws. If one state can have a commission to draw district lines, that means it’s allowed under the Constitution, and every state can do it that way. If one state (North Dakota) does not have voter registration, or one state runs voting through the mail, every state can do that. In states where voters must register 30 days before an election, for example, citizens can demand a change in the law. It’s only in the past few years that almost all states have implemented online voter registration. These laws are fluid, and voters must speak up for what they want.

 

I have been keeping tabs on election turnout since 2016, the year Trump won the presidency by roughly 75,000 votes among three states. More than 94 million people didn’t participate. It is such a shame that many people were convinced their vote didn’t matter. It did - and it does. Margins were slim again in 2020, as Trump’s infamous call seeking 11,780 more votes in Georgia attests. More than 2 million Georgians didn’t vote in 2020, and every vote clearly mattered.

 

As I was researching election data, I learned that young adults, ages 18 to 29, were the least likely to vote. They were also the most likely to be surrounded by misinformation. Millions are in high school, college, or starting their first jobs. We know where to find the next generation. We should be imparting information to them about participating in elections and in our democracy.

 

I kept saying I would write a book for them. I finally did it, in time for the 2024 elections. If young adults are persuaded that their votes really matter, will they vote? Many of them find today’s politicians out of step with their beliefs. They are the generation that grew up with shooter drills in school, gun violence on campus, heavy student debt, and denied abortion access. They grew up alongside immigrants and DACA recipients, and they have heard about sustainability their whole lives. They make up most of our military. They’re the ones suffering most from social media ills. These are all issues being discussed in the halls of power. I realized that I must persuade young adults that they have the ability to install leaders who do care about their issues and will work to solve them. If more young adults vote, they may get representation that truly shares their agenda and favors the solutions they favor. 

 

My dive into 2020 election data showed me something spectacular. To all those who think their votes don’t matter, here is the evidence that it does. In the 12 most populated states in the country, accounting for more than the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidential election, margins were small enough that the number of eligible voters who didn’t participate could have easily changed the outcome in their state had they voted. That’s power.

 

Lastly, to those who say they don’t like their choices and will not be voting this year or will vote for a third party candidate, I ask you to reconsider. Someone is going to win. In the presidential contest, it’s not going to be a third-party candidate. As of this writing, it will be Donald Trump or Joe Biden. Whoever wins will appoint heads of every federal agency – the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, and the Attorney General. The President also appoints the US Ambassador to the United Nations, the Director of National Intelligence, the US Trade Representative, and the heads of the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Management and Budget, Council of Economic Advisers, Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Small Business Administration. The heads of the FBI and the CIA are also appointed by the President. All of the appointees must be confirmed by the Senate, but the point is that these positions will virtually all go to people from the President’s party and carry out the President’s agenda – and that will be vastly different under Trump or Biden.

 

What I want to say to nonvoters is this: even if you don’t like your choices, there is too much at stake to sit out the election. The same goes for Governor of your state. Your representatives in Congress and in state houses help decide the balance of power in those bodies, and the majority party controls the agenda there too. 

 

There are many reasons why people don’t vote. I hope to give millions of non-voters reasons to vote.