‘Neutral’ campaign should convince non-voting Amsterdammers, but does that make sense?
Last year’s national elections caused a stir in the Stopera. The council had put up posters throughout the city calling for people to go to the polls and stand up against discrimination, climate change or increased safety on the streets.
Too many politically substantive themes, said Poot of the VVD, who wanted a ‘neutral turnout campaign’. She has support from D66, among others. Mayor Femke Halsema also ruled that the municipality should stay far from political topics, which are already planned not to be done per social topics.
The new attendance campaign has now been launched and it is said to be neutral. What that looks like: the municipality focuses on groups that are represented and distributes informative videos via social media about what the city council does, what a district committee is and how you can vote. The films can be subtitled in, among others, English, Turkish and Arabic. Other measures: voice transport for the elderly has been implemented, the Stemwijzer has been developed and there is a special campaign for young people.
Threat to Democracy
With the campaign, the municipality wants to try to equalize the differences in the city. In the city center sometimes more than 90 percent of the neighborhood shows up, in some neighborhoods in Southeast and New West there is 20 percent.
Political scientist Floris Vermeulen (University of Amsterdam) agrees that it is important to boost these percentages. He acts, among other things research to the 2018 council elections and regularly asks the question: what is a democracy worth if 80 percent of a neighborhood does not participate? The answer is positive: “Participation inequality is an attack on the functioning of democracy. It just seems to keep growing. As these people, parties will not also participate in their interests. From the perspective of the parties, that also makes sense: you respond where your projects are, but in the end you undermine based on the entire system.”
Vermeulen doubts that the new initiative of the municipality is a meaningful solution. According to him, a ‘general neutral’ campaign is not successful in reaching people who are not heard by politicians. “To convince people you will have to somehow determine your group is no longer participating.”
The political scientist sees that the discussion about turnout campaigns is being conducted more often. In 2014, the municipality wanted a campaign aimed at people with a migration background. By name, the campaign was opposed and eventually withdrawn. Vermeulen: “I understand that it is convenient to place on themes, because as an umbrella institute you are doing something that will certainly benefit political parties from an electoral point of view. But as a municipality you also have to be concerned about the system itself. As far as I’m concerned, that takes precedence over party politics.”
diploma democracy
Another target group of the campaign are young people from Amsterdam. The turnout among young people is generally at elections. For example, in 2018, 42 percent of 18 to 35-year-olds showed up at the polling station, with a total turnout of 55 percent. According to political scientist Roderik Rekker, it is not so bad because this group is absent, but the focus should be on actual young people to stay away.
Theoretically trained youngsters often fail to show up due to a lack of interest. Rekker: “They are less likely to have the confidence that they can make a difference in the middle of politics. Research shows that if a young person does not vote the first time, there is a good chance that he or she will never vote again. The participation gap is therefore only widening and we are getting more of a diploma democracy.”
Many of these young people live in Southeast and New West. One option to better reach them is more citizenship education. The municipality is in the process of setting this up for secondary vocational education. Rekker thinks this is a good development. “But this is not quite sketchy and erratic. There is a lot to be gained if you attract them better.”
Vermeulen argues in favor of conducting this discussion more intensively, especially outside election time. “The discussion about voter turnout always starts shortly before the elections. But you can see the emergence of specific tasks over time. Have a fundamental discussion with each other about why elected groups have dropped out, regardless of party politics.”