Online Only: The One-Issue Voter

In two weeks, patriotic Americans will go to the polls to perform their civic duty, and I will, reluctantly, be among them.\nYes, I love America. I've been to several places that are not America, and that makes me love America even more. And democracy isn't half bad, compared to the alternatives. But voting is kind of a drag.\nOstensibly, voting is the vehicle by which citizens control the decision-making process and voice their concerns. But in our representative democracy, voting simply doesn't do that. You can never find one candidate who perfectly represents your every political concern, or even most of them.\nSuppose you vote for Candidate A because he'll protect your right to unionize, while Candidate B threatens that right. But once in office, Candidate A passes legislation that outsources your job south of the border. Thus, the voter's concerns are thwarted regardless of his vote.\nSo when you go to the polls, you just have to make the best of it. The way I see it, there are basically three ways you can vote.\nYou can vote straight ticket: You decide one party deserves your whole-hearted support, so you throw your weight behind it.\nOr you might feel the weight of responsibility in your decision: You investigate and inform yourself of every candidate's position and carefully weigh each against his or her opponent. This is probably the way the system was intended to work.\nBut too much democracy becomes overwhelming. The first ballot I ever looked at had roughly 1 million candidates on it, give or take a few. On the school board alone, there were three people running for each of a half-dozen seats. I couldn't even remember all their names, let alone their positions on banal issues that won't affect me.\nThat brings me to the single-issue voter. This method combines the expediency of the straight-ticket vote with the faithful execution of informed decision-making. Since no candidate represents all your concerns anyway, select the weightiest issue and make your decision based on that. Thus, in 13 days I will be using my vote to support the right of unborn Americans to live.\nObviously, there are flaws to this voting method, as with the other two. For example, in 2004 I found myself supporting some men who have codified a policy of torturing detainees; some of those same men also started a war in the Middle East that has killed a lot of people.\nBut patriotism demands that my first concern be for those fellow citizens who are tortured and killed before their birth. In fact, patriotism aside, sheer numbers dictate that 1.3 million infanticides demand attention before the misery of a few hundred detainees.\nI've heard it before: "You're throwing your vote away!" I realize legislation will not overturn a culture of infanticide; the fight is for the hearts and minds of the American people. So in fact, my vote of conscience might be most importantly applied not to the Senate, but to the local school board races.