Voting is one of American’s greatest rights — a right many Americans had to fight to receive. So when candidates running for office do anything that might devalue the institution of voting, it calls into question how much these candidates truly care about the Americans within their constituencies.
As election day approaches, it is becoming increasingly apparent that there are some candidates who are willingly choosing to spit on the process that leads up to election day — the process that forms and protects the institution of voting.
Voting is not just a one-day event that involves one person casting a ballot. It is a months- or years-long process. A process that involves informing voters and holding candidates accountable through public forums.
There are some candidates running for office in Alabama who have chosen to skirt their constituents and avoid any public debate. They’ve removed themselves from the public deliberative process and are relying solely on their incumbency and the Rs beside their names.
Both Gov. Kay Ivey and Rep. Mike Rogers have refused to debate their fellow candidates running for office.
Debating is sacred to the institution of voting; it tests the candidates’ platforms and gives constituents an opportunity to compare the candidates face-to-face. Perhaps more importantly, it gives voters a chance to see how the candidates perform under pressure and how deep their knowledge of policy truly is.
For incumbents like Ivey and Rogers, debating may even be more important than it is for new candidates.
These debates allow constituents to test incumbents, to ask them about their records and to hold them accountable for past decisions.
It might not be politically strategic for them to debate. In such a red state, they’re likely going to win anyway. A debate, at best, would do nothing for their campaign. At worst, it could decrease the margin by which they lead their opponents.
Candidates should value principle and transparency over political expediency and wider polling margins.
This apparent lack of respect for the democratic process simultaneously shows a lack of respect for the voters in Ivey’s and Rogers’ constituencies.
They seem to be entirely too comfortable with the offices they hold.
The exact point of an election is to make incumbents uncomfortable. They should be uncomfortable. An uncomfortable incumbent will do more for their constituency than a comfortable, complacent one. The more comfortable incumbents become, the less incentive they have to stay true to the beliefs, wants and needs of the people they should be serving.
How comfortable Ivey and Rogers are should be making voters nervous.
With complacency comes a lack of transparency. And a lack of transparency may lead to corruption.
Remember former Gov. Robert Bentley? How about former Chief Justice Roy Moore? Bentley and Moore are cautionary tales of what happens when voters allow candidates to become comfortable in office.
This is not to say that Ivey and Rogers will act corruptly while in office, but this is not to say they won’t either. It is every voter’s job to hold candidates accountable.
But, when candidates do not afford constituents an opportunity to judge them on their merits in a public forum, voters cannot hold them accountable.
But until voters decide this behavior is unacceptable, it is likely to continue.
Election day is Nov. 6. Visit alabamavotes.gov to find your polling place.
Editorials are the majority opinion of The Auburn Plainsman's editorial board. If you would like to submit an op-ed, visit this page.
Do you like this story? The Plainsman doesn't accept money from tuition or student fees, and we don't charge a subscription fee. But you can donate to support The Plainsman.
The opinions of The Auburn Plainsman staff are restricted to articles marked "opinion" or "editorial." This editorial is the majority opinion of the Editorial Board and is the official opinion of the newspaper.
The opinions expressed in columns and letters represent the views and opinions of their individual authors, not the opinion of the newspaper. And often, those individual opinions conflict with the opinion of the newspaper.
These opinions do not necessarily reflect the Auburn University student body, faculty, administration or Board of Trustees.
