I'm tempted here to expand the argument, perhaps suggesting that this type of change would make us collectively more receptive to other election changes, such as allowing online voting (we can call this an "innovation", if you are the sort who ignores that Estonia started this a decade and a half ago). The possibility that a name change could improve chances for future process improvements might not seem entirely important to a certain type of American, who I will gently describe as oblivious, perhaps primarily concerned about watching TV on election night, excuse me Fox News, Election Night. However, if the nonsensical controversies generated by mail-in voting last year proved anything, it's that we are suffering for a collective fear of change in this centuries-old process that defines our system of government, and we should be trying everything in our power to help others overcome their fear. If something as simple as using new labels helps people come around, then I think we need to try it.
But forget that for now, let's return to the latter point from above, the "late" voting concept and what it implies, which I bring up more as a symbol of the issue. The point is that I think words matter, particularly names, in the way they help us understand what's going on in the world, and in this case calling it early voting might suggest to some that it's not a serious way to cast a ballot, or at least the correct way. I suspect there are countless people in every election who, having had an opportunity to vote early, never gave the possibility any serious thought, reasoning perhaps that the correct way to vote was to stand in line like my father's great-grandfather did back when Columbus wasn't just some guy who got lost. It seems like an innocent decision, this impulsive notion that early voting is simply incorrect, and of course it's almost obnoxious of me to criticize someone else's decision about voting - I mean, isn't the whole point of voting to accept someone else's choice? I think so, even if the behavior of Democrats and Republicans suggest otherwise.
But in this example, all I think someone accomplishes by waiting until the correct day is to make the line a little longer for someone who didn't have time to vote early, and who definitely doesn't have time on election day - excuse me NBC, Election Day. Life in this country is simply too difficult, and we should accept that not everyone is going to have an hour to stand around waiting to cast a ballot on some Tuesday evening in November. And that's not to suggest the only effect is on others - what if this hypothetical voter, waiting patiently to do the American thing and vote at the right time, suddenly has to deal with an unforeseen circumstance and can't go to the polls? When I say what if, we know what I mean - the vote is lost, wasted, not counted at all, the same way it's not counted anytime a person goes home because the line is too long. I suppose the reasons explaining these types of lost votes may only hold the most tenuous connection to the label of early voting, but I think the stakes are too high to dismiss anything that might cost the country even one vote.
I'm open to change, but I'm realistic about it, too - we have early voting, but we'll never have late voting. So what's the point of calling it something that might lead to a missed vote, which means a wasted vote? This is an American tragedy that only an Estonian can truly appreciate. Since there's nothing special about calling it early voting (and according to my rant thus far some possible negative effects), I ask - what's the point? Most of the average Americans I know won't even try new food unless they saw it on TV, so we should be sensitive to the difficulty of rethinking basic democracy, which has unfortunately become tied into the big event mentality of election night - excuse me ABC, Election Night. There is a certain pageantry of participating in a collective activity, then seeing your fellow citizens on the news that same night, and given how we're talking about an almost uniquely American event I know it's a hard sell to change our ways. But what the cameras miss is everyone who was left out, either by chance or by design, in part because we are mired in the 18th century thinking that dismisses out of hand the concept of having a fortnight to cast your vote. They may call it a civic duty, but I'd prefer to think of it as an obligation, not to just cast your vote but to make sure we all can; we should be doing all we can to make it easier to vote, even if it's something so small like thinking about a better name for certain parts of the process, because doing otherwise would mean living in a county that's not worth voting for at all.
