Andrew Carboni Essay 3 Responding to Ethical Controversy

Andrew Carboni

SAEL 200

Dr. Neal Polhemus

Final Revision of the Ethics of Voting on College Campuses

Revision is an essential process to create one’s best work, and this case is no different.

Regarding the prior essay, reworking was clearly necessary. The main problem was a lack of

concrete ethical theory, which brought down the overall effectiveness of the paper. The lack of

substance created a theoretical base of the problem but did not delve into the complex moral

crisis at hand. Secondly, minor stylistic changes were made to clarify existing ideas and to create

a sense of flow throughout the essay. Finally, the use of floating statistics has been rectified, as

statistics without connections to a concise claim lack power. The focus of this revised essay is to

ground the argument in real world problems and avoid straying into the abstract, while

intentionally developing moral theories in the physical world.

Universities are pillars of curiosity and advanced thought, founded to establish a haven

for driven individuals to seek a brighter future for themselves and their communities. Yet, this

idealistic notion of their founding has become warped, as colleges have begun to forget their

original purposes. Athletics, national image, and revenue are the most important things to Boards

of Trustees, presidents, and alumni across America. This is not an attack on universities, as they

are doing what is best for their brand and are simply following their own morals and values.

However, students can feel left behind by their schools, as though their voices are not valued.

But to delve into the disconnect between a university and its students, one must first disassemble

the ethical systems of morals that each side embraces.

1
Andrew Carboni Essay 3 Responding to Ethical Controversy

Universities are in an unenviable position of power: balancing athletics and academics to

create a recognizable brand that can recruit both the best athletes and scholars from around the

country. Yet, they simply cannot cater to the conflicting needs of every individual; it is an

impossible endeavor. So, to reach a middle ground between revenue and ethics, universities

follow a model of utilitarianism, where decisions are made based upon the theory of doing the

most good for the most people. However, this strategy does not appeal to all individuals, as it

tends to prioritize athletics and other national competitions rather than specific concerns of the

general student population. This is where colleges struggle to portray their actions as ethically

sound because common students feel like second-rate citizens to athletes and top scholars within

their own campus.

Colleges take the stance that voting is an individual decision, and that voter turnout is not

a problem for them to address. Should the university have a duty to encourage activism and

action from its students, or do students have a duty to make their own choice? Encouraging civic

education does not directly benefit the universities, so the issue morphs into a personal or

political problem, which colleges wish to avoid. Thus, this divide between students and their

institutions on the issue of civic duty lies in a discrepancy of expectations of the role of a

university, with colleges relying on a utilitarian form of reason to justify their positioning, while

students are expecting an equivalent standard of education and investment across the board that

prepares them for their field and adulthood.

Colleges argue for individual choice, as the students in question are all legal adults who

are responsible for their own decisions. Whether students decide to vote is an issue that the

university sees as outside of their sphere of influence. A study published by the Social Science

2
Andrew Carboni Essay 3 Responding to Ethical Controversy

Quarterly found that of eighty-six voting precincts on forty-two college campuses across five

states, Americans aged 18 to 29 who were college educated were far more likely to vote in

comparison to their non-college counterparts of the same age. A second study conducted by

Professors Richard Niemi of the University of Maryland and Michael Hanmer of the University

of Rochester found that 59% of college students aged 18 to 24 voted in the 2004 Presidential

election, while the surrounding region of 18- to 24-year-olds voted at a significantly lower 46.7%

rate. With these studies, colleges can claim that the responsibility not only does not lie with them

to encourage voting, but that universities are already doing more than enough simply by

instructing students, since education has a consistent positive statistical correlation with voter

turnout.

An example showing the values of many larger institutions is the Southeastern

Conference, also known as the SEC. Reports of college costs for facilities, staffing, and other

expenditures per student found that the SEC spends on average twelve times as much on every

athlete as opposed to their common students, according to the Delta Cost Project at American

Institutes for Research. Those figures amounted to almost $164,000 per athlete. The study also

found that athletic spending grew at over twice the rate of academic spending over the same five-

year period. Circling back to the foundational morals of higher education institutions - a place to

encourage academic and personal growth - there is a clear disparity with the priorities of

universities. Schools choose to pump funds into a few select regions of the institution that are

wildly successful, like specific programs and athletics, to maintain an image of success rather

than attempting to invest in other sectors that may be struggling to encourage a well-rounded

university. This analysis demonstrates the values where universities begin to deviate from

students, who want to feel supported and appreciated regardless of major or interests. Students

3
Andrew Carboni Essay 3 Responding to Ethical Controversy

expect an education and degree that has been invested in by their university. This is where the

importance of voting comes back into play, as elections offer a chance for those who may be

forgotten to be heard and for change to occur. Colleges value financial success, so academics and

preparation of students for adulthood, including voting, is put on the backburners.

With colleges failing in the eyes of students, non-profit organizations sprung up to meet

demand. One group that has become an international powerhouse on college campuses is the

Campus Vote Project, which is an organization dedicated to normalizing student voting through

partnerships with colleges and universities across the nation, from student voting guides to

answering questions regarding voting registration. They have sense of duty to help others, to

improve communities, and to make adhere to their ethical opinions of man’s responsibility to one

another, an approach that embodies the moral theory of Deontology. Every individual deserves to

have their voice heard, and they have taken it upon themselves to serve a population that needs

help. Their goal is to actively encourage college students to take control of their voice and

influence their communities. Studies from Ohio State University in partnership with the Campus

Vote Project detail the hardships that students faced in the 2020 election in comparison to older

generations, including “‘strict voter ID’ states that do not allow students to use their student ID

as identification at the polls,” (Czajkowski). Other obstacles include temporary residency

confusion, rumors about absentee ballot illegitimacy, and inexperience. All of those factors cause

low turnout among college students, according to Ryan Drysdale, the associate director of the

ALL IN voting initiative at Ohio State.

Rather than oppose the universities and their opinions, ALL IN, the Campus Vote

Project, and other organizations reach across the divide to work with colleges and universities to

4
Andrew Carboni Essay 3 Responding to Ethical Controversy

better provide for students. This method has proven to be effective, as a study from the Center

for Information and Research of Civic Learning and Engagement demonstrated. The data proved

that universities have a “statistically significant impact” on voter turnout among their

constituents, particularly through three major methods: civic instruction, the encouragement of

community service, and service learning. The unique values of non-profits such as the Campus

Vote Project has created a difference in solutions, citing an ethical emphasis on doing the right

thing for all individuals.

One trend that non-profit organizations cite is that of voter inertia, a phenomenon first

documented back in 1973 by Donald Searing, Joel Schwartz, and Alden Lind, renowned

sociologists and political scientists at the time. According to this theory, voting is habitual and

showing up to the polls to cast a ballot is psychologically proven to have a positive impact of the

likelihood that the same individual votes in subsequent elections. In fact, the likelihood that

someone votes jumps from around 30% up to near 60% if they voted in the first election they

were eligible to do so in. Thus, non-profits have called upon colleges and universities to do

more, since they believe that the ethical duty of colleges are to prepare its students for adulthood,

molding them into freethinking individuals that can contribute to society.

As aforementioned, college students are underrepresented at the polls, and society has a

moral obligation to provide a solution. Their voices are not being equitably heard due to

legislative roadblocks and educational failures. That is not fair, ethical, or democratic. A just

democracy must listen to the voices of all citizens, not just the ones with the most resources or

experience. A fair system has a moral obligation to provide equal opportunity for all, not just the

5
Andrew Carboni Essay 3 Responding to Ethical Controversy

advantaged. Thus, the proposed solution has three parts: one focused on the university, one on

the non-profit, and one on the political level.

With the success that the University of South Carolina and other institutions have seen

with programs like University 101, the first part of the proposal is to educate college students so

they can become civically invested in their communities. This would be done through a

community-built curriculum that would be taught during a class session of University 101, which

would teach students the basics of civic education. In this curriculum would be base concepts

from historical voting trends and laws to civic terminology and frequently asked questions, with

room for alterations as regionally needed. Secondly, students need help figuring out how to

register to vote. Non-profits like the Campus Vote Project can aid this effort. They have run

campaigns to effectively connect with students and register them to vote either in their college

town or back in their hometowns via absentee ballots, so the same system can be applied at the

University of South Carolina. Having a person to walk a student through the entire registration

process at a tent in central locations across campus would allow students to have an easier time

registering to vote properly. Finally, students can reach out to the local Board of Voter

Registration and Elections and appeal for a polling place on campus. College campuses are a

central location where thousands of students congregate daily and will be the most effective

location to increase turnout.

In terms of ethical theories, John Rawls’ “A Theory of Justice” discusses the moral

concept of justice without leading into abstraction. Rawls defines justice as “the principles that

free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial

position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association,” (Rawls). Rawls

6
Andrew Carboni Essay 3 Responding to Ethical Controversy

divided justice into two separate principles: equality of rights and duties of citizens, and socio-

economic inequality is only just if lower-classed individuals gain fair compensation. These two

ideals only can exist by overlooking natural talent and preexisting socio-economic circumstances

to create a just society. This world can exist if every member of society buys in to the social

contract they entered at birth. Justice is fair, the byproduct of free, rational civilians.

Rawls’ theories of justice fit perfectly into what the ethical solution for what the college

student voting crisis should entail. By educating each college student with the same material,

there is a consistency between all individuals. Secondly, by moving the polls to a centralize

voting location, students have an equal opportunity to easily access the polls. This solution

would be fair to each student enrolled in face-to-face learning and encourage college student

turnout. However, an ethical flaw with this proposal would be those who could not afford college

or did not get accepted, as they would not have access to the educational resources or be as close

to polls as their college-enrolled counterparts would be. This flaw is obviously not morally

justifiable, but it is still a step forward, and the focus of future solutions can be on non-college

young adults.

Meanwhile, according to Robert Nozick, justice is negative liberty without coercion,

centered around the concept of the minimal state. This state embraces three policies: no

paternalism, no morals legislation, and no redistribution of wealth. Nozick stresses self-

ownership, and repeatedly referred to taxation as forced labor, for the state would be claiming his

earnings, which in turn would claim his time, thus claiming a portion of him as an individual.

Nozick is all about choice, and the individual has free reign to do whatever they please with their

wealth, time, or resources, assuming the acquisition was ethical. Nozick’s libertarian principles

7
Andrew Carboni Essay 3 Responding to Ethical Controversy

keep the state out of the business of the individual, for the minimal state ought to be “limited to

enforcing contracts and protecting people against force, theft, and fraud,” (Nozick).

Nozick’s opinions would fall under a slight grey area when it comes to the proposed

solution to the college student voting crisis, as it would involve too much intervention from

powerful entities, but that entity would not be a state or federal government. Thus, his libertarian

theory of justice would not be as open to the aspects of a mandatory civic lesson, yet this

proposal is still superior to government intervention in the civic process. In applying Nozick’s

entitlement theory, he would take issue with any intervention of an individual decision by a more

powerful organization. The proposed solution is not one that sits well with Nozick and his

freedom from coercion concepts.

The lack of college presence at the polls is a critical concern that desperately requires a

solution that is both effective, comprehensive, and ethical. The best solution involves a plethora

of groups invested in the problem and a compromise to create a working and morally acceptable

solution. Combining the resources and knowledge of universities, non-profits, and local

government allows for an attainable solution. Ethically, the solution adheres to John Rawls’

theories of justice far more than those of Robert Nozick. However, no solution will perfectly

align with every individual’s morals, but the current plan is one that can effectively combine

morality with plausible effectiveness. College students are in a crisis, and action must be taken

now to aid American democracy. (Word Count: 2399)

8
Andrew Carboni Essay 3 Responding to Ethical Controversy

Works Cited.

Ardoin, Phillip J., et al. “The Partisan Battle Over College Student Voting: An Analysis of

Student Voting Behavior in Federal, State, and Local Elections.” Social Science

Quarterly (Wiley-Blackwell), vol. 96, no. 5, Dec. 2015, pp. 1178–95. EBSCOhost,

https://doi-org.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/10.1111/ssqu.12167.

Campus Vote Project, Fair Elections Center, https://www.campusvoteproject.org/about.

Czajkowski, Bella. “Ballot Bound: The Challenges of Voting as a College Student.” The Lantern

Projects, 24 Nov. 2021, https://www.thelantern.com/projects/project/ballot-bound-the-

challenges-of-voting-as-a-college-student/.

Eustice, Kristi, et al. “‘There Are Issues That I Care About’: What Drives Civically Engaged

Student Voters. Pre- and Post-Election Analysis of Arizona State University Student

Voting Behavior and Attitudes.” Morrison Institute for Public Policy, Aug. 2021.

EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED615095&site=ehost-live.

Hester, Jacob Andrew. “State Laws and Mobilizing College Student Voter Turnout.” Journal of

Student Affairs Research and Practice, vol. 56, no. 5, Jan. 2019, pp. 520–34. EBSCOhost,

https://search-ebscohost-com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1237980&site=ehost-live.

Immanuel Kant, Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785).

John Rawls, “Distributive Justice,” in A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of

Harvard University Press, 1971).

John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism (London: Parker, Son & Bourn, West Strand, 1863).

9
Andrew Carboni Essay 3 Responding to Ethical Controversy

Niemi, R. G., and M. J. Hanmer. 2010. “Voter Turnout Among College Students: New Data and

a Rethinking of Traditional Theories.” Social Science Quarterly 91(2):301–23. Voter

Turnout Among College Students: New Data and a Rethinking of Traditional Theories* -

Niemi - 2010 - Social Science Quarterly - Wiley Online Library

Petchesky, Barry. “SEC Schools Spend $163,931 per Athlete, and Other Ways the NCAA Is a

Bonfire for Your Money.” Deadspin, Deadspin, 17 June 2013, https://deadspin.com/sec-

schools-spend-163-931-per-athlete-and-other-ways-5976391.

Plutzer, Eric. “Becoming a Habitual Voter: Inertia, Resources, and Growth in Young

Adulthood.” American Political Science Review, vol. 96, no. 1, 2002, pp. 41–56.,

doi:10.1017/S0003055402004227.

Pritzker, Suzanne, et al. “Learning to Vote: Informing Political Participation Among College

Students.” Journal of Community Engagement & Scholarship, vol. 8, no. 1, Spring 2015,

pp. 69–79. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/10.54656/vnhp5824.

Robert Nozick, “Distributive Justice,” in Anarchy, State, and Utopia (New York: Basic Books,

1974).

Searing, Donald D., et al. “The Structuring Principle: Political Socialization and Belief

Systems.” American Political Science Review, vol. 67, no. 2, 1973, pp. 415–432.,

doi:10.2307/1958774.

10