One. Good evening. One will come to the Cato Institute we are debating the question and it is sometimes said for libertarians at least why is there some government the with a very specific pact that it should go to and the director of health policy. And the center for constitutional studies with the libertarianism i am also Research Fellow with some ground rules, and you hear is to be interpreted as an endorsement we do not take sides. And we will do our best to avoid that that is not what were trying to tell you that will last questions of the panelists did not alternating order. They must speak questions to have a five minute closing statement hopefully we wont run too far over and do the best that we cant so we should turn it over to the affirmative side. 8q for participating in those watching at home. Maybe one or the other. There are three reasons to vote one is a direct influence on the outcome that in direct influence on other political actors that they will discuss mostly. So that people are arguing against voting because there is almost no way that your vote will affect the outcome so i want to assess briefly the cost benefit to go to the back of the envelope. To start with cost this a take 1,000 hours to figure out how to vote do have to educate yourself every issue . Not really if you are a libertarian you already know enough about the issues. Maybe there is a line. And then to knock it down quite a bit. Only that you are voting in the president ial to show that your chance to affect a president ial election is one in 60 million. And your conclusion would be that is not worth doing i am out of here. But another study assesses the value to affect that is based on the 2 trillion with the iraq war. So that is worth 5,000 if you stop the vote from happening so maybe taking it down by a factor of 500. So you have to vote did in the senate. So then go 10 of value. That house raise 1. 15. York governor maybe it can affect to be the deciding vote as your governor. Dogcatcher . So the Initiative Campaign is a pretty big deal with the 9 billion bond issue that could be quite valuable one in 1. 3 million chance to say it is worth 5 you will spend a little more time pet chance to affect them are small but the value in is high. That it is more like 53. That is direct influence one of my favorites dollars, myself. [laughter] they are a dazzling roman candle of information the Political Parties and these witnesses are incorporating that when moss margin that you create even if it doesnt prevent the election of a candidate. But that to be on inauguration day. Talking about people who decide to run those a get behind candidates are not those that right based on all of this. Of course, donors. And i have not quantified that also social influence and then tune continue with that topic. And the good news with the planet so whether libertarians should vote and those that do not care that just wants to complain if you confirm the stereotypes if they were basement dwellers were then you should not only not cope with them back about it. You should log and insinuate those who do vote are irrational. If they want to make the rule that better place you should vote. Talk about the benefits of voting the influence on policy in comes. So the benefits of voting on the policy outcomes are even greater than they suggest. And that is primarily because people see that as an act of carrying. Here is a thought experiment. So she fears for her son to stop the frisk nationwide so they already believe that libertarians will they care about preserving. If you tell her i agree but i dont vote let me tell you why the libertarians are your real friends. What will she think . Will her mind me open to your ideas or the latina that asks you to vote for to help clean up the neighborhoods to fifth thoughts of the federal government deporting her grandmother will she believed libertarians are her friend . Would you believe that what. Some people will think you are selfish some people dont open their minds and that not only applies to you every libertarian. They have thousands of obedient followers on twitter. If they broadcast voting is a good idea their followers will vote. Give partake. If they broadcast smart people dont then they wont. So the decision to not making it your thing but what of all libertarians made it their thing. Kennedy and johnson and a lot more twitter followers. Fifth and it will not have then impact with their twitter followers. We will depress that libertarian voting even more. What if there were 2 million twitter followers what about the creators of south park or celebrities should they encourage their followers not to vote . Pretty soon you talk a body significant number of votes not to show up at the general election or in the tallies in the primary elections that our more important arguably or even in the of polls of voters because they screen if you voted or likely to vote in the next election that can skew how politicians view and their views will not show up in Public Opinion surveys to the ones that the politicians pay the most attention to. But they could if they play the cards right. Glenn is not dead he is a right turn in hollywood now to say it is just a classic collective action problem libertarians they all voted. With a policy outcomes study individual libertarian has an incentive not to vote if i dont like to spend time doing other things. That is not likely to affect the ultimate outcome but to follow that incentive we are all worse off. Everyone else those believing in liberty or equal dignity creates a social norm that people should do the socially beneficial thing they benefit from adopting a social norm. The optimal strategy is to coordinate. There are principal reasons not to vote but i felt that libertarians who oppose now jim said we should close to even offer a picture of his seven wearing me ive voted sticker. [applause] in fairness the other side has adorable voters to i will now allow them 10 minutes. Thanks for coming also agenda for coming up with this event and for letting me join on. That jim went over this already but your vote does not matter to be very clear in most situations. The article that he cited that is the Gold Standard one added 60 million that is general if he were in California Voting republican it could be one at a billion with the respective value it is a different question one of a billion chance with the ability something would get past of have to run those numbers and then come up with a twopoint 5 million to thousand 353rd power to make a difference. Those are relatively close elections like a runaway victories like reagan or roosevelt no single blow has ever decided to president ial election. Despite the argument about margins with turnout is the same problem he did not contribute to that no politician has ever said i 1. 4. O 07 and then i would have had one but that is never happen once in history in 2001 looking at a 56,000 contested elections end of those 40,000 they found seven decided biasing will vote there was one Congressional Election decided by a single vote in buffalo 41,000 votes cast but upon the recounting the single vote disappeared which leads me to bush viborg making the single vote matters but actually that proves it never comes down to the 500 votes it will be decided by courts and lawyers not by the actual voters. It is not up for debate you have not mattered in any election ever have voted it is not a wonderful life situation to take you back to say look at the world that have been when you did not to vote in would be the exact same world except to have more time because you did not vote we should rephrase and the question why should they do that ineffective activity with the outcome concern . Think about it that way theres a lot of reasons actually anything effective is a good reason if they say why dont you rain dance they would say it isnt effective if you ask people why dont you vote because it is an effective that seems weird. You all know it doesnt matter so it is weird most of you are on the other side and we are the weirdos in the room so what matters is what michael pointed out yes it doesnt matter but voting in the aggregate does that is a true statement we will not be addressing today voting in mass matters. And me began when i wrote an essay laying out the aspects i thought people would rarely recognized. He responded with the title dont not vote. A vegetariaif vegetarians abstam eating meat because they believe there are troubling aspects against the benefits and they do this knowing full well that any individual decision to not eat meat wont save the life of a single animal. We dont take this as evidence that they are behaving irrationally. What about jehovahs witnesses clashing with their principles do we condemn them for not fulfilling their civic duty, are their principles stronger or better than ours . Dc voting to some extent like the quakers had jehovahs witnesses do. Your vote has no impact on the direction of the country and even still it doesnt take much time or effort, but that doesnt mean its without cost. It has a deep symbolic meaning in our culture and that is both overplayed and wrongheaded. Trevor and i are geared as are many of our colleagues here because we have a fundamentally different view of the state than most people. We believe the authority has limits and theres a private choice thats not allowed to penetrate. Doing everything we vote on, nearly everything the president ial candidates have said they would do falls outside the bounds of libertarian principle. Its symbolically signing on to what those people will do in your name and given that the outcome will likely be profoundly on libertarian that isnt something im willing to do. Like eating meat to a vegetarian come even though i know abstaining wont influence the government and it different direction i also know it wont make it worse and at the same time allows me to maintain my principles and with my sense of justice, which is important because i got into the world to make it better and i can do that by pushing back against the history on an incoherent view most americans have about the voting. That makes me weird, i admit that i i am happy to embrace ad its a beard and if i wish more people would as well. Its not just a positive good, it can be dangerous. This might sound weird but people have been talking about the dangers of voting and it seems madison was terrified of voters. The progressives were terrified so they started creating the administrative state. All the while the government has grown to be the most powerful organization in the history of humankind controlling daily lives to an almost unimaginable and unacceptable degree making us hate each other in the progresprocess. Process. The fetishization of voting buttresses the idea that its a check on the government and the justification for whatever government does. But many are beyond the legitimate powers of government. We need to step back and accurately characterize voting as a weak and inadequate form of choice that cannot effectively support the weight of the government that claim legitima legitimacy. They can have a real cost of people raise voting to the pinnacle of the engagement which many do and they ignore other types of engagement. When president obama intraoffice it was like a messiah. He would solve things and make it better. The Antiwar Movement of the left mostly disappeared because of the partisanship and also because obama was going to take care of it. Because it is perceived it can be dangerous as we see in every peoples republic of in the world. What if they held the election and nobody came. Whoever tha that would be betwen hitler and stalin they are only giving the ability to say however many people voted they claim legitimacy. My vote doesnt matter and your vote or not vote doesnt matter. Lets agree both are symbolic. You can vote for the candidate you enjoy and feel like you are doing your duty and i dont buy not voting but its important for me to stand up and remind people whats wrong with voting on the things we do. If there was a referendum on a National Haircut and we started having a discussion about whether or not youre going to get the hippie or the marine and people started coming out and saying make your voice heard, dont you believe in democracy, somebody has to stand up and say we do not vote about these things loudly and without shame and honestly. Thank you. [applause] thank you to both sides. I will now be asking each side questions. I will alternate from one side to the other. However i will tolerate some impromptu crossexamination and back and forth because i think thats healthy, and i trust my colleagues hear me sufficiently to respect my authority. First question is on the negative side. I can imagine your arguments making the opponents very, very happy. If you dont vote, the median voters that much less libertarian. As a median voter always carries the election what do you say to that . If i personally do not vote but there is an unofficial but can figure out how much the changed because it would be a small amount. If all libertarians dont vote and they try t theyd try to cot into a question about voting en masse battering which we are resisting and point it isnt wrong for libertarians to not vote and theres other ways of trying to do social change but i think changing peoples minds about whapeoples mindsabout whn terms of how much it can check the government is beneficial and can change the median voter. Also argue the question about the median voter is related to jims arguments about giving a cost to how much or both might benefit us or other people. They assume the candidate we would be voting for stands some chance of winning. If those arguments work they would seem to push in the direction of being obligated as a libertarian not just to vote for someone in the major twoparty candidates who can win as opposed to throwing their vote away for someone like gary johnson or another independent candidate who stands no chance of winning unless your vote stands no chance of influencing one direction or another. If it is germane. The argument throwing your vote away is irrelevant. What do you think about throwing your vote away . Does effectively. A vote of conscience isnt thrown away. A vote for a thirdparty candidate isnt a throwaway vote if what youre trying to do is build support for that perspective over time. The way you do that is by having more votes in that column this year than you did last year or the year before. You cant just assume other people dont exist. Trevor actually influences more people more then he mayb than he thinks. We cant just assume youre making all of these decisions in a vacuum and other people dont exist. A vote for a thirdparty candidate is only thrown away if you think the only thing that matters is whether your vote will be the deciding vote on who gets to be president or wins this or that. I can also imagine your argument because if all libertarians voted it is still conceivable we wouldnt win but the decision would be perhaps to have more of a popular mandate. This is the collective decision in which you have participated what do you say to that . Voting symbolically legitimizes or makes us responsible. Its like to olds in a sheet voting on what you have for lunch. If the sheep screams i both know that doesnt legitimize the process. You can vote for whoever you want if for whatever reason you want. You are registering your opinion about how the government is going to use its power and if you say i dont want it to use its power come if you want to send that message you can do that. Theres nothing about voting for you could vote for john anarchy if you wanted to or boatie mc boatface. In brief before i get to my answer, i want to discuss some points of agreement. They each said that they were weird and that is one point of agreement but i do think the example of the National Haircut was a bar thrown in the direction. [laughter] i am inclined to believe there is a minor signal in participating the vote and maybe someone somewhere, look at all the voting participation that there is and therefore the outcome is valid that is a minor and are rarely used to signal as compared to the margins of the victory in the electoral races themselves used by Congressional Staff and the signal that is given off as much more powerful in many different instances than the socalled ratification in the democratic process. On the sheep it seems perfectly reasonable and saying i dont know to say you dont get to vote on this. This isnt the kind of thing we vote about. Also, they dont use coercive force and that seems like an argument about the Ballot Initiative should we make it illegal, yes or no, and that wouldnt seem to violate the libertarian principles but it certainly doesnt seem to apply to candidates or anyone who has a reasonable chance of winning because they have some things that are libertarian but lots of things that are not. Its not an application of use of force. And for the signaling perspective, my sense is that people take voting on seriously. So writing mickey mouse or a pretend candidate is at least as offensive and offputting as abstaining from voting. Is going to the booth all that you require or just leave it blank is that better . I will start with that yes or no. Go to the ballot box and cast a blank ballot and satisfy the requirements. Of the degree of signaling improves if you voted for one of the candidates as opposed to writing mickey mouse but if you write a legitimate person and say this was my choice, and youre telling the person youre trying to bring to your side i care about the community. We are together on that. Now come my way on the substantive issues. I dont think that it only applies to the Ballot Initiatives. When you are voting for candidates for office, we are selecting between different people and deciding who will get all these preexisting covers that exist in the apparatus of this particular office. I dont think its legitimizing or that it validates the candidate i did vote for. If what im trying to do is cast a vote for the candidate i think will do the least bad stuff do you say that two jehovahs witnesses clacks that they should vote for the least bad it depends on think the non libertarians shouldnt vote svotes with depends how libertarian. [laughter] im going to move on. I have a question. Quite a few people are unhappy that we are even having this debate. Weve been told we risk making ourselves look to the general public. Our point in the rain dances may be true that they are an effective at generating rain. But anthropologists have pointed out they serve an additional function which is social cohesion. In times of crisis and periodically even without, communities perform rituals to bind themselves together as a community. What do you say about the function of voting . Some are child sacrifice. I believe in social cohesion but i actually think that voting pulls us apart in