What would it feel like to live in a nation where each citizen is as comfortable exercising the responsibility to vote as we are our right to watch reality tv?

Is there any place in the world where voting works the way we dream it ought?

Sunday’s election in the European Union may have served more to manifest what appears to be the current apathy of its citizens than their choices regarding the content of the proposed European constitution. In his article today, Thomas Fuller suggests several possible reasons behind a 44.6 percent turnout, a number arguably disappointing.

In my opinion, in this case at least, a bottom line exists. These people were not locked inside the closet and tied to a chair, their life under threat should they go to the polls. All Sunday’s turnout shows for certain is that non-voters acted as though voting were less important than going to see the latest Harry Potter film this weekend.

In this respect, the European Union is not so different from the United States. Thomas Patterson, author of The Vanishing Voter, writes that voting in our country fell to a 39 percent turnout in the 2002 November election, with a low of 18 percent in the congressional primaries. Patterson notes that studies show the voting rate among those at the bottom of the income ladder is only half that of those at the top. Correspondingly, low-income voters were recorded as 30 percent more likely than higher-income groups to feel that the results of the election would have little or no impact on their lives.

How do we get people to exercise their civic responsibility of making their political needs known to the government? Is voting outdated?

Will creating controversy do the trick?

It’s possible the prospect of losing our civil right to vote will make it more desirable. Ina Howard and Greg Palast suggest the advent of computer voting in this November’s election is likely to result in a leap backward in the civil rights movement. The “Help America Vote Act,” which Congress passed in 2002, requires all 50 states to computerize voting files by the November 2004 election. “Suspect” voters will be easy to purge from these voting lists, according to law, by our 50 secretaries of state.

According to Howard and Palast, prior to the 2000 presidential election, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris succeeded in removing 57,700 voters from Florida’s vote registries. The reason given for their removal was supposed status as felons and ex-cons. Closer investigation by Palast revealed that the voters removed from the registries shared two characteristics. Not only was “virtually every voter” wrongly accused of felony, many were also registered as African American.

As we learned from The X-Files, the truth is “out there.” The truth in Palast’s discovery may be a shocking revelation of our time. Will it motivate people to vote?

We’re extremely fortunate to live in a society where information runs rampant. Unfortunately, all that information may make people feel overwhelmed. It’s entirely possible non-voters are as overwhelmed by information overload as they appear to be apathetic. If that’s the case, how can we get non-voters to vote?

Perhaps it is radical and simplistic to suggest that we offer voters a little incentive. But it’s also true that, in this country at least, offering “two for one” or “a dollar off your next purchase” goes a long way. What if voters could redeem ballot stubs for five free songs burned off the Internet or a free tank of gas? Would more people vote if a ballot stub could be exchanged for a free lottery ticket and a chance to win 100 million dollars?

Thomas Patterson’s examination of the decrease in our voting population offers several workable solutions. The media networks could do their part by broadcasting the televised debates at prime-time. Campaigns could be shortened to pre-1972 status; Patterson found that long campaigns “tax voters’ attention”. Polling hours could be extended, election day could be made a national holiday, and voter registration could be made automatic. Last but not least, our schools could better prepare, educate, and register our young people for their first election upon graduation.

We are each capable of contributing to the solution. Wouldn’t it be great if we could each just manage to drag ourselves over to the polls on election day? But in case some people need extra help, we can offer a hand to our neighbors on our own, or through organizations we create or to which we belong: our nonprofits, our unions, our religious institutions, our universities.

Patterson is refreshing in that not only does he analyze the problem, he offers tangible solutions. His point is valid. Encouraging citizens to vote may seem like an insurmountable challenge, but we need to recognize the alternative. It would be more difficult still to maintain a democratic system if the majority of the people our government represents has been struck dumb.