$1,000 to you But $1,000 is a benefit to you of voting only if it is your vote that determines the outcome The probability that any statewide election will be decided by a single vote is, effectively, zero State elections that are decided by as many as a few hundred votes are likely to be subject to several recounts, each of which is likely to produce a different result The outcomes of extremely close elections are ordinarily decided in the courts or in legislative bodies; there is no chance that one vote would, in fact, determine the outcome Thus, the $1,000 benefit that you expect to receive will not be a factor in your decision about whether to vote The other likely benefit of voting is the satisfaction you receive from performing your duty as a citizen in a free society There may be additional personal benefits as well from the chance to visit with other people in your precinct The opportunity cost of voting would be the value of the best alternative use of your time, together with possible transportation costs The fact that no one vote is likely to determine the outcome means that a decision about whether to vote is likely to rest on individual assessments of the satisfactions versus the costs of voting Most people making such decisions find the costs are greater In most elections, most people who are eligible to vote not vote Public choice analysis suggests that such a choice is rational; a decision not to vote because the marginal costs outweigh the marginal benefits is calledrational abstention Rational abstention suggests there is a public sector problem of external benefits Elections are a way of assessing voter preferences regarding alternative outcomes An election is likely to a better job of reflecting voter preferences when more people vote But the benefits of an outcome Attributed to Libby Rittenberg and Timothy Tregarthen Saylor URL: http://www.saylor.org/books/ Saylor.org 827