access

[Seth Ackerman]

> ----------
> From: 	Doug Henwood[SMTP:dhenwood at panix.com]
> Reply To: 	lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Sent: 	Tuesday, November 07, 2000 10:54 AM
> To: 	lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Subject: 	access
> 
> I know Teixeira says that, but the few surveys of nonvoters that 
> exist were conducted after the election, and people tell pollsters 
> they would have voted pretty much the way other people voted. That's 
> not surprising, given that no one wants to be perceived as a loser. 
> It's hard to believe, though, that people with below-median incomes 
> would vote like those with above-median incomes if their interests 
> were seriously addressed by plausible candidates.
> 
> 
>From this week's bulletin from the Harvard Shorenstein Center's Vanishing
Voter project:

"When asked about the federal budget surplus, likely voters are more
inclined 
than non-voters to say it should go to a tax cut, debt reduction, or 
strengthening social security. Non-voters are more likely to say it should 
be spent on domestic programs in such areas as health, education, and 
welfare. "This preference reflects the fact that non-voters are 
disproportionately Americans of less education and lower income, who are 
thus more dependent on government services," says Tami Buhr, Shorenstein 
Center Research Coordinator. "And their non-participation gives political 
candidates even less incentive to pay attention to their needs and
concerns."