Quantcast

Democracy Inaction

Stick-conquest.jpgElection results are in and Austin has let its true voice be heard. The overwhelming response to the polarizing and contentious debate over the smoking ban, three city council seats, education funding, and municipal elections was a resounding,

"Meh, who cares?"

According to the unofficial results released by Travis County, a whopping 14.29 percent of the electorate felt the urge to exercise their civic rights and participate in our little experiment called democracy. Just over 70k of the nearly 500k registered voters either cast their ballot early or went to the polls on election day. This is just sad.

What did the select 14% of us decide for the rest of you?

ACC Proposition: Passed with almost 80% of the vote.
Smoking ban: Passed with 51.83% of the vote

City Council:
Seat 1: Lee Leffingwell won with over 62%
Seat 4: Betty Dunkerly won with 63.5%
Seat 3: There will be a runoff between Margot Clarke and Jennifer Kim
Clarke garnered 40% of the vote and Kim got 27%
Early voting for the runoff will be May 25-June 7.

*Municipal results and precinct by precinct numbers can be found here.

For those of you who love numbers: If 1% of the electorate who disagreed with the smoking ban and didn't vote had gotten off their asses and hit the polls, the smoking ban would have failed. Not only would it have failed, but it would have failed by a larger margin of votes than it has just passed by.

Oddly enough, this isn't at all contradictory to the structure the oft lauded Founding Fathers put in place so long ago. The will of the few dictating the fate of the many. In this case though, it was not due to some outmoded indirect electoral system, but entirely caused by the apathy and indifference of the masses. In this climate, those who choose to participate exert disproportionate power over those who don't.

Which group are you in?

Contact the author of this article or email tips@austinist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

Comments [rss]

  • nickk

    Sorry, I can't agree with your christmas tree comment. I firmly believe in a separation of church and state. Although christmas has almost completely lost its meaning as a religious holiday, it is still based on religion.

    The difference between your argument and the smoking ban is that public schools are just that - public. Private establishments, such as restaurants and bars, should have the choice whether or not to allow smoking.

  • Z

    "christmas tree at school? are you serious? do you have any idea what it feels like to live in a country with 'no official religion" and still have to endure the seemingly endless holidays of someone else's religion?"

    well I guess you side with the anti-smoking crowd, cause those people do not want to "endure" smokey bars and clubs, so they decided to eliminate them. I'm not a holy roller by any means but it seems that instead of a society where everyone has a right to do their thing and those who choose not to participate don't participate we are becoming a country where small groups can dictate what the society as a whole can and cannot do.

  • nickk

    I am getting fat, and I blame french fries. Although I have every right not to buy french fries, or even go to restaurants that serve french fries, whenever I'm around them, I can't seem to avoid them. For that reason, I propose that they should be banned. This will solve my problem, and the probelm of obesity in general. Society will benefit and I will lose weight, yay!

  • Ayn

    Fuck the 9% of Austin who think democracy is a way to vote away the RIGHTS of minorities.

    This time it was business owners' right to allow dangerous behavior (smoking) in their business and employees' right to choose whether to work in a dangerous occupation.

    Next, why not cyclists (get those traffic hazards off our roads). After that, pick your target...

    We're all fucked if people think that the rights of minority groups are open to public vote. THIS IS THE PURPOSE OF RIGHTS!

  • I'm not sure about the holiday part, whether our civil liberties are violated by publicly organized/funded impositions of Hallmark bric-a-brac persuasion… but I sure would like to smoke trees at shows here in Austin. Even the shwaggy stuff. Christmas or otherwise. Even though I always fall asleep right afterward. After a Whataburger.

    I'm just sayin'.

  • em

    christmas tree at school? are you serious? do you have any idea what it feels like to live in a country with 'no official religion" and still have to endure the seemingly endless holidays of someone else's religion?

  • Z

    non-smoker here who voted against the ban. Its def. a civil liberties issue for me. This is unfortunately what America is becoming, if some people don't like something (Christmas tree at school for example) the rest of the people can't have it.

  • GR

    It's a tough call. Personally I don't smoke but it NEVER stopped me from going to see shows and friends in bars despite that I hate the smokey, contact-searing atmosphere. I agree that the owners have the right to run their business the way they want to, so I voted against the ban. I'm hoping that smokers will still support their beloved bars, despite all the terrible clean air they will be forced to breath all night.

  • Here's the deal Tom:

    The smoking ban will work. Congratulations. Bands will still play around town, and nightlife will somehow manage to survive, in some form. But don’t expect the same nightlife or the same bands to be around.

    Soon, fair voter, you will be able to take your eight-year-old to sixth street once they make Emos: all-ages (every night) and Antone's begins to host the Icecapades. A large part of this issue is that artists do not make a whole lot of money playing here in Austin. Few break even (including the bigger acts). They come here for the youthful, collegiate crowds (ie: reckless, raucous, groups below the mid-twenties who tend to over indulge in many things) to cut their teeth in live venues. To test their sound in the rough-and-tumble that is: Austin (they could easily go to San Antonio, Dallas, or Houston for more money, vanity, and stodginess). In other words, it is the SCENE which attracts the talent you are complaining about being DISCOMFORTED to see. That does not mean that you have to smoke to be a part of the scene. You are also free NOT to drink. Or sweat. Or drink PBR until you vomit behind the Galaga machine at Beerland. You don’t even have to bust The Robot at an Arcade Fire show to join in. But you cannot vote against the scene and then demand to be accepted by it. That is simply ridiculous.

    Which is what it certainly sounds like you just did. For the sake of Austin’s future music scene, I hope I have the wrong idea. But I’ve been here long enough to know I should worry.

    Besides, if any band wants to, they can simply demand that their show be smoke free, which several opt to do. And the smokers tend to follow their wishes. Bygones.

  • justin cox

    sean, you are my hero.

    non-smoker as well.

  • sean stonecutter

    Your personal space? Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure that the space in Beerland belongs to Beerland, not you. That 5 dollars you paid to get in? You're paying to occupy and drink in that space. If an establishment chooses to allow smoking in their space, that's their right. Or at least, it was.

    For the record, I'm a non-smoker.

  • Michael Barnett

    "The majority has spoken"? You missed the point. The majority hasn't spoken. The majority hasn't even gotten off the couch. 85.71% of people didn't vote. The minority has spoken, and its will shall be done.

    What about drinking. Say i don't like drinking, but I love going out to shows. I don't want to be surrounded by drunk people. Drunk people instigate more violence, account for thousands of deaths on the roads per year, and make for an overall uncomfortable environment in downtown bars and clubs. I think their right to drink is infringing on my right to be out at a club without being around people who are drinking. Drinking also causes disease and illness, so is bad for the general health of our community.

    Would you also vote to ban drinking, or is that an attack on personal freedoms because you happen to actually like drinking?

  • Tom

    Democracy RULES!!!!



    Sucks to be a smoker, but you know what I'm not a smoker and I exercised my right to vote and guess what? My VOTE counted!

    Finally I can start going to see some music and to the bars downtown more than once a year. Finally I can arrive home after playing pool without having to trash bag my nasty smelly smokey clothes until I wash them, and having to take huge amounts of allergy meds the next day. Yes smoking is a freedom you are right, but so is being able to go to a bar or music venue and not have my personal space and lungs invaded by someone else's freedom. Freedom only can go as far as to the point of infringing upon someone else's freedom before it becomes not a freedom but a taking away of freedom. Smoking does that exact thing, taking away freedom of non-smokers everyday. The arguement that non-smokers can just go somewhere else is foolish and filled with holes at best. That very same arguement can be reversed, smokers can smoke at home before they go out, or after the show, or outside. Enjoy your freedom to smoke just don't do it by taking away the freedom of non-smokers. Just because you have an addiction to smoking doesn't give you the right to force your addiction and freedom upon others.



    The majority has spoken, too bad September 1st is still over 3 months away! Alas I guess I can wait that long to start visiting the bars and clubs again, since I've waited this long already.

  • I can already picture it: chalk outlines on 6th Street deemed acceptable for smoking. I'm guessing 6th Street is wider than 30', so you'll probably see a 'yellow brick road' from Red River to Congress run right down the middle of the street. Oh, and hotels, office buildings, and those pricey condos are all exempt from the 15' rule, so guess who's coming to loiter in front of the Driskill?





    They'll probably need a special section of the Chronicle to explain where to light up next SXSW.

  • Michael Barnett

    By the By... if you think "that's ok, i'll just step out of the bar on 6th street for a smoke when i want one", you are sadly mistaken. You can't smoke within 15' of a door or openable window to anywhere that has a smoking restriction... which will be every place on 6th street. That means, unless the street is closed, it will cost you one misdemeanor and up to 2,000 dollars to light up pretty much anywhere on 6th street come this september. How is that for sweet?

blog comments powered by Disqus

send a tip

tips@austinist.com