> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # No one cares if you vote, likewise if you complain - URL: https://www.smdp.com/no-one-cares-if-you-vote-likewise-if-you-complain/ - Published: 2006-11-07T16:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-25T01:14:14.000Z - Author: David Pisarra - Tags: Opinion, Santa Monica, #archive-import, Homeless *WHAT’S THE POINT?* I’ve said before that it does not matter whether or not you are a Republican, Democrat, Independent, Green, Yellow, Purple, Communist, Socialist or undecided, we all love to complain about our elected officials. One of my biggest pet peeves is that people who don’t vote should sit down, shut up and wait to share until after they’ve played in the game. I do not approve of people who will not participate in their government, but want to criticize it. This is not to say that everyone must vote. I believe that a person has just as much right to abstain from the process as to participate. It is, however, intellectually dishonest to withhold oneself from the process and then criticize the results. As a society, we do our best work when the most people contribute their efforts, ideas and labor to the collective goals. In this case, it would be casting a ballot to approve or disapprove the various propositions and candidates to public office. It is important that individuals contribute their voice to the chorus of the electorate. Everyone that abstains, which really is just a nice way of saying I’m too lazy to make a decision, is allowing someone else to decide for them. That allows a small number of voters to make big decisions for everyone. I’m a business lawyer. I see the world as a businessperson. I believe that government should be run like a business, and any good business must do its part to ensure that the environment it is working in remains healthy. Part of a healthy environment means a wide selection of qualified candidates. But if the candidates are not qualified before they run, and few people vote, then who can we blame when we have “bad government?” Ourselves. We have only ourselves to blame, by not demanding more of our elected officials, not after they are in office, but before. When they are running. We get the candidates we demand, who then become the government we want, not the government we wish we had in a perfect world. Today, we have yet another opportunity in the endless rounds of elections to decide who will run the city, what those elected officials can and cannot do, and how much money we will dedicate to public works. The election itself is statewide, and there are several large state measures on the ballot that will affect our society for decades to come. Or not. The sad truth is that most of the propositions will be denied by the public. Not because the public has listened to both sides, or that they have studiously reviewed the intricacies of the proposed legislation, but rather out of indifference. As voters, we have been inundated with propositions, initiatives and campaigns, and frankly, most of us are tired of reading. For those of us who wade into the public spotlight to pontificate on such matters, we find the reading a necessary evil. But for the majority of our state’s electorate, a society that likes its news in sound bites and makes choices based on how it impacts their pocketbooks, the constant onslaught of reading is becoming more and more cumbersome. This is evidenced in a slowly declining number of votes cast, which makes each vote that much more powerful. As the national parties try to drive voter turnout with “hot-button issues” like gay marriage, the war and the economy; the local political action groups try to drive turnout by reliving the age-old problems here of the homeless, living wage laws, council ethics reforms and proposals to increase the local property taxes. Hopefully, something will work and we will have a large turnout, but the odds are against it. There are simply too many decisions being passed to the electorate for their approval. The whole point of electing leaders is that they are supposed to lead. We shouldn’t have to decide if the City Council can take jobs while still in office, for the second time, after the case has been heavily litigated — all on the public dime. We have several ballot measures that deal with the infrastructure of the state and the city. They are as clear as mud and most people, I fear, will just vote “no” — not because they are against them, but because they are too poorly worded to be understood without a significant effort to untangle the language. That is the problem with this governing by initiative. We are actually putting too much on the people who don’t have the time, and frankly the inclination, to study this type of material and make reasoned, educated decisions. The reason why we elect leaders is to lead. Our job as the electorate is to determine who can best dedicate themselves to the task of studying the issues and finding solutions, then implementing those solutions. This is why we need people to vote. The voters are supposed to choose who their leaders are, then have them take the lead. If that happened more, we might have fewer elections, and that would probably increase the voter turnout. That, of course, presumes that we can find qualified people who want the job of being a leader. David Pisarra is a business development lawyer for the Santa Monica firm Pisarra & Grist. He (310) 664-9969 or *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on November 7, 2006.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/110706.pdf?ref=smdp.com)