New Orleans       Criminal justice and penal facilities have become hot button issues with demands ranging across the board from restorative justice to abolition to whether constitutional prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment are constantly ignored and racial discrimination is systemic.  The politics around these issues have become unpredictable and toxic given the competing claims for reforms whether increasingly punitive or more rehabilitative.

Nowhere are these issues more contentious than in New Orleans, often crystallizing around the parish jail and the presiding sheriff.  The last election saw a former councilman and multi-term sheriff turned out of office as voters went with an inexperienced newcomer demanding reform and promising change.   The election didn’t change the underlying problems.  Other city officials and some citizen groups decried the need for a new jail despite court orders demanding it and construction far along.  Underpaid deputies and missteps by the new sheriff didn’t help the matter.  Construction costs are significant.  The city balked at paying its share, and the merry-go-round of accusations and counterclaims was endless.

The first term Orleans Parish Sheriff Susan Hudson has been none too popular.  Not reading the public’s temperature, Hudson incredibly took a proposal to the ballot to double the tax revenue received by her office attracting a humiliating 9% support from the voters, while 91% of them administered a butt whipping of epic proportions.  Unsurprisingly, there is a queue of candidates who have indicated they are ready to challenge her in the next election.

Nonetheless, with the current millage expiring at the year which provides $13 million or so and 20% of the sheriff and parish prison’s budget, she had to take it to the voters.  Incredibly, with almost 25,000 votes in a low turnout election only drawing 10% of Orleans Parish voters, the final total was12,715 “yes” votes against 12,713 “no” votes, passing the measure by only 2 votes, the closest election in anyone’s memory.  If any single voter had gone the other way, the measure would have lost.  The opponents had claimed “no new taxes,” when this was nothing new, but a renewal. Though the sheriff said “a win is a win,” there’s now a recount in process, and even in victory, the sheriff can’t be confused about the gale force winds facing her in a coming election.

“Every vote counts” is part of every civics class and every politician’s GOTV message.  Rarely do we see these narrow margins in practice.  Losing an election in high school for student council president by one vote was a lesson that has undoubtedly shaped my organizing career and hyper focus on organizing math and counting “yesses” closely.  Despite my opposition to Sheriff Hudson and distaste for her hapless and inept administration, I couldn’t abide making the situation worse for the workers and prisoners by starving the office of the continuing income from the millage, so I voted “yes.”  Like many, maybe I was the difference here?

The other lesson in this particular election is not simply that my vote counted, but that 90% of the voters once again proved that to make a difference, you have to show up and be counted.  The “no” votes may have been a protest or moved by fake news, but they also participated.  Not voting is not a protest.  It’s a democratic desertion.

If we care about the role that elections play, we have to respect both the winners and the losers, if for not other reason because they joined in the contest and the ultimate decision.  What is past understanding and deserves our collective and united approbation should be how 90%, who will pay one way or another, either now or later on this issue, didn’t even bother to vote.  For elections to measure the health of what’s left of our democracy, people have to vote, one way or another, because it’s actually true that every vote counts.