by Greyson Ritchie & Jon Sims, ACCLA Class of 2027
At our latest virtual session on Campaigns, Elections, and Voting in Arkansas, we kind of just expected to learn more about how elections work in Arkansas. What we did not expect was to leave thinking so much about why people choose not to participate in the first place, both historically and currently, how that has to change for Arkansas to change, and what that means for the future of civic leadership in our state.
How We Got Here
Dr. John Davis opened the day with a memorable comparison of Arkansas’ early history to a choose-your-own-adventure book, where the state seemed to repeatedly choose the wrong path. From the influence of the powerful political group known as “The Family” to early banking failures that left Arkansas with debt, his illustration set the stage for how political decisions can shape a state’s future for generations, leading us to where we are now, which was a fascinating way to begin the conversation because it made us consider how much centuries-old history influences the expectations of our government right now. From there, we began wondering whether generations of political frustration have contributed to a culture where people no longer see the value in participating.
Dr. Cameron Wimpy’s presentation highlighted a really striking contrast in Arkansas’ 2024 election: 72% of Arkansas ballots were cast early in person, yet only 53.5% of eligible citizens voted. So the question remains: why does participation remain so low despite accessible early voting? Our discussion revealed no simple answer — historical patterns, political apathy, limited civic education, and even uncontested elections all play a role. This left us wondering: if civic participation isn’t prioritized across generations, what motivates people to engage?
We also very much appreciated learning how much thought goes into administering elections. We discussed ballot design problems, especially around the 2000 presidential election, and how election processes have evolved in response. We were very surprised to learn about how decentralized our system is. Elections aren’t run only by the federal government; states and local jurisdictions carry much more of that responsibility, and understanding these systems gave us a much greater appreciation for the behind-the-scenes work that keeps our elections running smoothly.
When There’s No Real Choice
We also heard from the author of one of our readings, Karlie Barnett, who presented her research on democracy in Arkansas. This introduced another pressing consideration. Her findings on the number of elections without genuine competition were memorable and a good reminder that if citizens believe an election is already decided, it makes sense that they would be discouraged from participating. We agreed that encouraging more people to run for office and giving voters meaningful choices is a significant step in rebuilding engagement.
Barnett also introduced the distinction between internal and external efficacy: whether citizens believe they can participate in politics, and whether they believe political institutions will respond to their participation. We wrestled with this idea, as we had often viewed low engagement primarily as an individual responsibility. Still, our discussion helped me recognize that government has a significant responsibility, too.
Throughout the discussion, we kept coming to one question: “What does it actually mean for government to be responsive?” We agreed that responsiveness shouldn’t mean citizens get every outcome they want. Instead, we believe elected leaders should genuinely listen to constituents on both sides of the aisle and make people feel heard rather than dismissed — which is a monumental task. Still, I believe it is essential to growing civic engagement.
Lead By Listening
Perhaps the most meaningful moment of today, however, came from a member of our class. During discussions, a classmate openly admitted feeling nervous about engaging with people who are already exhausted by politics, and we immediately related to that concern. There was also something refreshing about the honesty. Political conversations can sometimes feel like environments where everyone is expected to have the right answer, defend their position, and never show uncertainty. Yet here was someone demonstrating humility — acknowledging a real challenge and admitting a lack of direction on solutions. That represented exactly the kind of civic leadership we need more of — humility and willingness to be taught and to learn. Always.
We believe effective civic engagement begins with listening. Before trying to convince someone why they should care about politics, we first need to understand what they already care about. What challenges do they face? What do they want to see improve in their communities? Only then can we begin connecting those concerns to the political decisions that affect their lives.
An Underused Opportunity
The session’s runtime was often grim for Arkansas elections. However, our last speaker, Kristen Higgins, left us with some positive feelings about the future of Arkansas elections. She mentioned that we are the only state in the South with all three “citizen initiative processes,” meaning Arkansas allows voters to propose and vote on amendments, referendums, and ballot issues. This was refreshing for both of us, especially after a day of difficult lessons about Arkansas voting and civic education, to hear that we can influence our elections in ways voters can actually use.
Ballot issues, referendums, and amendments are a difficult process to start, but they’re so rewarding for the Arkansans who get the opportunity to vote on them. After hearing how accessible our citizen initiative process is, we still wondered: why? Why aren’t Arkansans engaging with a process that lets their voices be heard directly? Frankly, some ballot issues are quite boring, and they may not be enough to convince people to come to the polls when they already feel the important races in that election cycle have been won. This can be changed, however. Civic leaders, ourselves included, can help others understand what these citizen initiative processes represent.
Furthermore, these ballot issues impact the state for future generations. Citizen initiatives keep our state honest and representative of everybody. We both really appreciated hearing from Mrs. Higgins, as she showed us what Arkansas has been doing right for so long, and it helped me imagine a future in which Arkansans voted on issues that they really felt were important, which perhaps doesn’t have to be so far away.
We left Friday feeling both nervous about the challenges ahead and excited to keep learning. Rebuilding civic engagement requires personal responsibility and meeting people where they are. Our main takeaway, beyond all the valuable experience we heard, is that, as emerging civic leaders, we must show up with humility, stay curious, and help others see that their participation remains invaluable to running this state.
Greyson Ritchie
University of the Ozarks, ACCLA Class of 2027
Responses