The Red and Black

Issue date: 8/19/08 Section: Opinions

ROCKY COLE

American politics never fail to leave me incredulous.

As an international affairs and economics major at the University, I always have assumed voters behave rationally.

After all, the ability to reason is mankind's greatest gift, right?

People always act in their own self interest and vote for the policy most beneficial for numero uno, the voter.

To assume people behave irrationally, at least in the academic world, is next to sacrilegious. Yet, thanks to the 2008 presidential election, this may be the year I turn to the dark side and embrace "irrational economics."

In his recent book, "The Myth of the Rational Voter," Bryan Caplan introduces his theory of "rational irrationality" to explain why democracies often fail to adopt the most socially optimal policies.

The basic gist is as follows: Americans harbor systematically biased views about the world, which they cling to at all costs.

When it becomes clear that one policy is better than another, voters engage in the process of weighing the costs of ignoring an obvious truth - in short, lying to themselves - over the benefits of clinging to their favorite policy.

On Election Day, Americans step into the voting booths and cast their ballots for whichever candidate shares similarly biased views.

Since one's vote counts only if it swings an election, Americans have great incentive to vote for the policy that feels the best rather than the policy that is the best.

Looking at the 2008 presidential contest, I cannot deny the appeal of Caplan's theory. Recent Gallup Polls show the issue weighing the heaviest on Americans' minds is the economy.

Although 48 percent of Americans trust Barack Obama to thwart the perceived coming economic apocalypse, only 32 percent trust John McCain's economic credentials.

This all seems straightforward enough, but here's the twist: a majority of Americans also disapprove of redistributing wealth to increase economic growth, a policy Obama wholeheartedly endorses.

Furthermore, a recent Reuters/Zogby survey of economists across the country has shown that economists favor McCain's plan over Obamanomics.

Economists are such staunch supporters of McCain that, even in the face of great public scrutiny, many stood by former senator Phil Gramm when he proclaimed America to be in a "mental recession."

Admittedly, differing opinions regarding which candidate is best qualified to oversee an economic recovery are not indicative of voter irrationality. But once Americans' views on foreign policy are taken into account, Caplan's argument becomes much stronger.

Nearly 93 percent of Americans now believe the Iraq War was a mistake, while a whopping 60 percent support creating a timetable for withdrawal.

Similarly, only a minority now believes we are "winning the war on terrorism," while a large majority think Iran's nuclear program is a threat to American security.

Yet, in a moment of what only can be Orwellian "doublethink," Americans overwhelmingly believe that McCain, hawkish policies and all, is more qualified to rescue American foreign policy from the damaging legacy of the Bush Doctrine.

In short, we seem to have our priorities backward: when we should favor McCain's economic policy, we choose Obama; when we should choose Obama's foreign policy, we choose McCain.

Why? Likely because it just feels good.

"Rational Irrationality" 1, Rational Voters 0.

- Rocky Cole is a sophomore from Kennesaw majoring in international affairs and economics.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools