Ellyn Peterson was completely off the mark in her June 18 opinion piece on voters and scandals.

Her contention that it’s historically obvious that scandal is one surefire way to lessen voter apathy is not only wrong, but the exact opposite is true.

By looking at only the increase in numbers of voters from one election to another, she shows her complete ignorance of the disturbing and ongoing decline in the percentage of eligible voters going to the polls.

While it may be true that 5 million more people went to the polls in 1976 than in 1972, the actual percentage of eligible voters voting dropped from 55% to 54%.

The same is true in 1984 when turnout declined to 53% from 54% in 1980, even though six million more people voted in 1984.

Postwar voter turnout reached it’s peak (63%) during the 1960 Kennedy/Nixon race, and no, it was not because of Kennedy’s sex appeal and questionable reputation.

Nixon actually won the women’s vote, while Kennedy was more popular with men.

This was largely because Kennedy was viewed as a bigger hawk when it came to relations with the Soviet Union and Cuba.

The mafia connections and womanizing stories, well known now, came out long after Kennedy was dead.

Given the Paula Jones lawsuit and other scandals during Clinton’s first term in office, according to Ms. Peterson’s theory we should have had a huge increase in voter turnout in 1996 from 1992.

In reality, these scandals, combined with the insipid and vacuous campaigns of both Dole and Clinton, drove 1996 voter turnout to only 49%, the lowest since 1924. The ongoing scandals and crises in government from the 1960s to today (Vietnam, Watergate, revelations about the CIA and FBI, Iran-Contra and numerous other ones, including more than a few during the Clinton administration) have resulted in a jaded and apathetic public whose confidence in government and elected officials is at an all-time low. Far from the current scandals being likely to bring out more voters in 2000, we’re headed for another record low turnout if the current level of political discourse continues.

Dave Harvey

Graduate Student

Public Administration