Introduction.

The study of voting behaviour is premised on the idea that the social characteristics of
voters explain the way they vote. The important characteristics are age, gender, race,
class, education, location. These characteristics determine the circumstances of voters
and define the issues that are most meaningful to them. These circumstances and
issues orient them to vote for one party or another and thus determine how they vote
on matters such as the state of the economy, issues of politics or social issues. Voters
identify themselves with a party that in their perception, best represent those issues.
Voters help to shape a political system. While some perspectives show how
governments and parties affect a society by their actions, studies of voting behaviour
show how an electorate by its voting behaviour affects parties and governments.
Voters force governments and parties to adjust their behaviour in order to win votes.
Parties develop ideologies and governments pursue policies that seek to meet the
needs of voters.
From this perspective, the entry of voters onto the political stage is a major defining
event of a countrys politics. Under the old colonial order when voting was restricted
to those of property, the political system reflected the interests of the propertied.
However, two major breakthroughs occurred that changed the character of politics in
the region.
First there was Universal Adult Suffrage won between 1944 and 1953. This meant that
all citizens, 21 years or older, had the right to vote. The second was the lowering of
the voting age from 21 years to 18 years in the 1970's. These events opened up the
arena of voter participation in the English-speaking Caribbean to a considerable
degree. Before adult suffrage the number of electors was very small. In the 1930's the
number of electors was about 3% of the population in ten English-speaking Caribbean
countries. It was about 5% in Jamaica, about 6% in Trinidad and 22% in the Bahamas.
After adult suffrage and the lowering of the voting age, the number of electors rose to
about 50% of the population in each country. Of the 35 million people in the
Caribbean about 17 million have become electors. Of these the younger voters have
become especially important. The youth have brought their own agendas and style to
Caribbean politics and further enlarged the electorate and since the 1970's the youth
vote has been very important in determining which party wins elections.
Voting and Democracy.

Voting behaviour is strongly related to the state of democracy. The levels of voter
participation is popularly taken as a key measure of democracy. High levels of voting
suggests a participant political culture. It indicates faith in the electoral system, the
choices offered by the parties and the feeling that voting makes a difference in the
nature of government. Low levels of voting might indicate an apathetic political
culture where the voter does not feel that he can make a difference or that parties and
governments are not subject to the will of the voter.
However, levels of voting might be affected by electoral laws. In some European
countries voting is compulsory and so voting levels might be as high as 90%. Studies
show that without compulsory voting, levels of voter turnout would have been
significantly lower in those countries. Also, in the US there is no system of
government registration drives and so some voters who decide late to vote are not able
to because they failed to register. Voting levels in the US are therefore lower than they
are in Europe and the Caribbean. In making comparisons of voting levels therefore
one must account for any differences in electoral laws.
Voting Behaviour in the Caribbean.
In the English-speaking Caribbean where electoral laws are similar there is a uniform
trend of voter participation among all the countries. Voting levels started from a low to
modest level in the first decade of adult suffrage. It steadily increased and peaked in
the 1970's. Then it declined from the 1980's into the 1990's.
In 11 Anglo-Caribbean states the average electoral turnout over the past decades have
been: 66% (1950's); 68% (1960's); 76% (1970's); 74% (1980's); 66% (mid-1990's).
Jamaicas voting turnout was the same as the group average in the 1950's and 1990's
but higher than the average in the 1960's, 1970's, and 1980's. In fact, Jamaica
sustained the highest levels of voting between the 1970's and the 1980's, a level of
82%. However, the overall picture is that all of the Caribbean countries have followed
the same trend of a rise and decline in voting levels. Whereas seven of the 11
countries had levels of voting of over 70% in the 1980's only one (Belize) had in the
1990's.
This falling away of voting has given cause for alarm over the state of democracy in
the region. In fact, new parties like the NDM in Jamaica have used this development
to say that the higher levels of non-voting indicate a dissatisfaction with the
established parties and the old style of politics. But even the NDM was not able to
attract many voters to the electoral process.
What explains the trend.

1. The youth vote. The lowering of the voting age in the 1970's had brought new
numbers of voters onto the electoral stage throughout the region. That along
with their greater levels of activism such as in the development of youth arms
affiliated to the parties, their idealism and radical ideologies favouring mass
political participation, explain the increase in voting levels in the elections in
the 1970's and 1980's.
At the same time the youth vote is volatile and very sensitive to economic
pressures. Young voters are less educated and skilled and do not have
established careers and so are more insecure. They are most sensitive to
unemployment and the lack of opportunities for education and training. It is
they who would be most supportive of policies providing jobs, training and
education but also easily alienated by the absence of these. The alienation has
become evident because of the structural adjustment policies of the 1980's and
1990's and the more conservative policies of these decades.
Carl Stone points out the effect of the youth vote in Jamaican politics. The
lowering of the voting age to 18 years brought an additional 30% to 40% of
new voters into the electorate. The youth vote was very important in the large
PNP victory in 1976 and in the socialist zeal that characterised the party in the
1970's. This in turn helped to drive older and more conservative voters to the
JLP. The JLP also launched an initiative to recruit youths to its party (Young
Jamaica) and the youth element of both parties figured in much of the political
violence that followed up to the 1980 elections.
The youth impacted on the PNP in certain ways in the 1970's. The government
pursued large-scale social programmes targeted at the youth, mobilized young
activists into participatory politics and recruited many into positions of
community and party leadership. Jamaican politics came to reflect the youth
factor much more than other Caribbean countries because Jamaica has a larger
youth component in its population compared to all other Caribbean countries
and one of the largest in the world. Jamaica therefore has a young electorate.
Jamaican governments are under more pressure to provide jobs, education and
training to this sector of the population or else face alienation or even violent
protests. This occurred from the 1980's under structural adjustment. As early as
1982, Carl Stones polls showed that as many as 50% of those between 18 and
30 years supported neither the PNP nor JLP.
This alienation is further explained by the fact that unlike older voters who
grew up with the parties and developed a loyalty to them, the second generation
of young voters had no such loyal attachment. The youth is therefore more

likely to vote on the basis of issues than on traditional loyalty and for that
reason are quicker to switch their votes from one party to the next. The youth
were willing to switch quickly back the PNP in the 1980's under structural
adjustment and sustain a high level of voting in that decade. However,
economic problems and the more conservative positions of both parties have
brought high levels of anti-political sentiments to Jamaican politics in the
1990's.
This explanation establishes many things: why voting rose in the 1970's and
declined after; why Jamaican politics is so much more volatile and prone to
violence; why Jamaican politics has been more radical and ideological; why
Jamaica had one of the highest levels of voter turnout in the radical period of
the 1970's and one of apathy and anti-system protest in the more conservative
90's; why leading even up to the 1997 elections more older voters said they
intended to vote compared to younger voters; why older voters make up a
larger portion of the traditionally loyal voters of the established parties.
It also explains that governments are not judged only on their economic
performance. Manleys PNP was popular in the 1970's because it captured the
imagination of the youth even though an economic crisis had begun by 1976,
and Seagas JLP lost the youth vote heavily in 1989 even though the party went
into those elections with four years of growth, the benefit of which however,
were not going to the youth.
The youth vote shows the importance of intergenerational differences in voting
behaviour. Older electors (30 years and over)vote more, and vote more out of
loyalty to the parties, and are important to base of support for the parties and to
electoral participation. Younger voters vote less and vote more because of
issues and are more likely to swing their votes and so become important in
determining which party wins an election.
2. Community/regional patterns.
Voting behaviour is determined by ones location. Ones community or region
might have a strong tradition of support for a party and he becomes socialized
into that tradition through family and peers. One reason is that parties and their
union affiliates might have first established themselves among sugar, rice or
banana workers and so their strength is based on the social and demographic
profile of persons in those areas. The Peoples Progressive Party in Guyana has
its strength among the rural Guyanese in the sugar and rice growing areas. This,
in turn, overlaps with race because historically East Indians have worked

longest in these areas. The Peoples National Congress gets its support from the
more urban, Afro-Guyanese.
Location overlaps with other social characteristics. The rural population tends
to be less skilled and less educated in contrast to the urban voters. So, there are
differences between PPP and PNC voters based on location, race, and levels of
education.
In Trinidad too, the tradition has been for the Peoples National Movement
(founded by Eric Williams) to have more support from non-agricultural or
urban regions. The United National Congress (formerly the United Labour
Front) of Basdeo Panday gets more support from agricultural workers which
his party was very instrumental in organising in the early days. Again, there is
an overlap with other characteristics. Agricultural workers are mainly rural East
Indians of lower education compared to supporters of the PNM.
The association between race and community voting is shown by a study of
voting behaviour in the 1976 general elections in Trinidad and Tobago. The
dominance of the PNM over the years could be explained by the fact that of the
countrys 36 constituencies, 19 had Afro-Trinidadians making up 50% or more
of the voters, 13 had Indo-Trinidadians in the majority and four had mixed-race
populations. In 1992, for instance the United Labour Congress (UNC) won all
the rural East Indian constituencies.
Where people vote along racial lines as they tend to do in Trinidad, the party
with a racial majority in more than half of the constituencies has a clear
advantage. Because these constituencies are geographically concentrated in
rural and urban regions there is also a geographical split in the vote and this
reinforces the sense of two societies coexisting tensely under one government.
This gives rise to calls or sentiments favouring secession into two nations
during periods when racial tensions are high.
In Jamaica, community and regional patterns of voting also exist. It is not based
on race but on community loyalty to a party. For many years, the Jamaica
Labour Party had been stronger in rural areas, especially in the traditional sugar
and banana parishes (St. Thomas, Clarendon, St. Catherine) where BITU
organisation had provided support among the agro-proletariat. The PNP had
been stronger in Kingston and St. Andrew, capital cities, main towns and
generally, the more urban areas. The lesser significance of sugar and banana
workers now mean that there is no safe JLP parish. In the last two elections, the
PNP won the vote in all parishes.

Except for 1980, the PNP has always won the majority of votes and seats in
Kingston and St. Andrew. It was this that drove Mr. Seaga to carve out a
garrison constituency in West Kingston to ensure continued re-election. This
started the garrison phenomenon. But with its natural urban working class
support, housing and social policies it was easy for the PNP to respond and
outdo the JLP with its garrison constituencies.
Garrison constituencies and garrison communities within constituencies, have
become the prototype of community-based voting. There are between 11 and 13
garrison constituencies. Party loyalty is strictly enforced by area dons. But
constituents born into these communities are highly socialised into the pattern
of party loyalty. The natural tendency to support a party along with the zeal of
these supporters often lead to over-voting and other abuses to the electoral
system. Violent forms of tribalism between garrison communities is typical.
3. Race, ethnicity and class.
Race and ethnicity are the main contributors to party preferences in Guyana and
Trinidad while class is more important in Jamaica. Greenes study of voting in
Guyana up to 1968 found two things. In the 1953 elections class was the main
bases of political support. The Indo-And Afro-Guyanese working class together
supported the PPP, including 92% of East Indians and as much as 80% of AfroGuyanese. However, after this the PPP split into two parties where the AfroGuyanese element formed the PNC under Forbes Burnham. Between 1957 and
1961 a racial pattern of voting emerged. In the 1997 elections there was a high
association between race and vote. It remains true therefore that race is the
most important factor in determining voting behaviour in Guyana.
In the 1997 elections, the proportion of East Indians in the population closely
matched the proportion of votes that the PPP received; and the Afro-Guyanese
vote for the PNC also roughly matched its proportion in the population.
In the case of Trinidad, about 56% of the population is Black or mixed and 40%
is East Indian. The dominant party since 1956 has been the PNM which has
relied on the black and coloured vote. The East Indian party was formed in the
1950's by Indian businessmen. It was supported by East Indian sugar workers
and Hindu religious organisations.
However, especially from the 1960's the East Indian movement was split
between Muslims who were more likely to support the PNM against the Hindu
party; and so too were Christianized Indians and the more educated and
urbanised (creolised) East Indians. This further strengthened the PNM so that

race voting was not as strict as in Guyana. The ethnic split between Hindus and
Muslims kept the Indo-Trinidadian community politically weak.
The PNMs dominance ended in the mid-1980's however with the death of Eric
Williams, an economic crisis and a backlash against the policies of patronage
which had been used to maintain the PNMs support. A Black dominated
coalition with East Indians formed the new government and when that coalition
broke up, the PNM returned but an East Indian dominated party was able to
win power in 1995 with a coalition.
Trinidadian voters are influenced by their demands on their government and
how they perceive the government is responding. Many races expect the
government to look after them; governments respond that they cannot provide
benefits on the basis of race; but voters still perceive that they do to the
disadvantage of their race.
Also, where racial voting is strong, a dominant race keeps its party in power
and there is less alternation between parties in government. This has been an
important difference between Jamaica where racial voting is less important and
where there has been more regular alternation of party governments.
In Jamaica, voting is determined by class more than by race. Although both
main parties draw their support from all classes some classes tend to support
one party more. The early JLP combined its working class support with that of
big business antagonistic to the PNPs socialism. The drift of the business class
to the JLP became more pronounced after the radical period of the 1970's when
it became identified as a conservative pro-business party.
The early PNP drew its support from the nationalist middle class, the
intelligentsia, and the working class. Its working class base increased during
the radical 1970's.
Class voting also overlaps with race. The JLP is supported more by the racial
minorities who comprise the business class. The PNP is supported by Black
Jamaicans.
4. Issues.
A number of issues motivate voters. However, the attraction to many issues
depends on the voters social characteristics and location. For instance, the
issue of unemployment is of more direct importance to the less skilled and the
younger voters. The attitude to patronage depends on whether ones social

group is a beneficiary or not. The attitude to crime depends on whether one

lives in a high-crime area.
Some political scientists distinguish between the materialist and postmaterialist values of voters to explain why some issues are more important to
certain kinds of voters. Material issues are those to do with meeting the
everyday material conditions of life - job, income, shelter, food/prices. These
issues have more salience for the poorer classes and younger voters.
Post-material values are the less tangible, less physical values like justice,
human rights, democracy, equity or the principles by which society is supposed
to live by. Those voters who have already satisfied their material values shift
their agenda of issues to these post-material ones. The more educated, higher
income voters are more likely to take up these issues.
The different predispositions of voters towards issues therefore make some
issues appear to be middle-class issues and others to be bread and butter ones.
For instance, the problems of the street people in Jamaica is seen more in
terms of justice and less in terms of poverty by the middle class who have taken
up this issue. The controversy over the telecommunications agreement with
Cable and Wireless seems to have less meaning for poorer people caught up in
the daily struggle of life. Constitutional reform is another issue that poorer
people seem less interested in.
Voters who are materially poor and socially or racially alienated from those
who have power are more responsive to issues like police brutality, political
victimization, basic hospital care, water supply, jobs, job security and pay
increases, personal security in crime-ridden neighbourhoods.
Often the more materially dispossessed classes/races are less interested in
means and more so in ends as compared to the post-materialist voters. For
instance, they might support patronage and demand that their politicians deliver
material benefits in exchange for the vote. They might support garrison
constituencies in order to make their community safe for the party that they
expect to obtain benefits from. They might vote for politicians of their own race
in order to ensure that their race is looked after. Or they might participate in
electoral abuse to make sure that their party wins an election.
For voters who are less dependent on patronage they would be interested in
ending the system of patronage politics as politically motivated use of
resources. They are more likely to see the police as forces of law and order than
as agents of brutality. They might see the need to end garrison constituencies

and electoral abuse. It is the middle class therefore that takes up issues of
constitutional and electoral reform. In this sense, the issues related to poverty
are those of the poorer classes and the issues related to democracy are those
more of the middle class. Political parties draw their support mainly from these
two classes and their character and programmes often show the tensions and
contradictions in attempting to serve sometimes conflicting objectives at the
same time.
Conclusion.
Voting behaviour is complex because people vote, usually for a complex set of
reasons. Most Caribbean political parties appeal to voters as multiracial and multiclass parties in order to obtain mass support. These parties are sometimes said to use
catch-all strategies to get support from as many voters as possible to accumulate
votes in enough constituencies to win elections. These parties, however, usually
identify more with some sets of voters as against others.
The main patterns of voting that influence the political systems of the region seem to
be age/generation, race/ethnicity/class, issues and loyalty. The loyal voter might or
might not base his support on class, race or generation. The emotional basis of these
motivations suggest that electors are not rational voters but moved to vote by their
passions.