2016 June 24^th

The news of this day is the Brits passing a resolution to leave the European Union. This has some consequences that many of those voting for it surely knew nothing about. A major consequence is that many of the trade treaties between Britain and her European partners will now have to be renegotiated: this will take years.

The economic response to this election result is predictable, and it has already happened; the stock markets around the world have dropped from three to seven percent; our own S&P, a broad index of 500 stocks, is now down about 3.5 percent and recovering from a more severe sell-off. The British pound is lower by several percentage points and that is great news for those wishing to buy a Rolls Royce, a flat in London’s Mayfair district or a bespoke suit from a Saville Row tailor. On the other hand, if your retirement depends on money invested in American stocks, plan to “eat in” a lot more often.

Why did the Brits do this to themselves and to the rest of us? It seems likely that the typical British voter had no idea of the ramifications of a successful vote to leave the Union. There was also a huge difference between the vote outcomes among various districts. London voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU; rural areas voted to leave. Scotland voted to stay in the EU and now they are considering another vote for Scottish independence so that they will not be bound by the British vote. This could also happen in Northern Ireland. In short, this vote could lead to the dissolution of Great Britain, which could now consist of just England and Wales.

Now that some of these voters have seen the results of their vote, they are having buyer’s remorse. One correspondent has said some voters are asking him to explain just what the EU does. This is a strange time to ask.

Churchill has said that the greatest argument against democracy is a five-minute chat with the average voter. Then George Carlin reminds us that half the voters are below average. While the Republicans are intent on guarding the polls against fraud by demanding ever escalating amounts of identification (which also keeps many poor people, often Democrats, from voting) there are no other tests required to exercise your franchise. States determine who can cast a ballot in their state and some will even allow convicted and incarcerated felons to vote. If you move to an assisted living unit for people with severe dementia, there will still be no loss in your right to vote unless a judge declares that you are unable to manage your affairs. Even this restriction doesn’t apply in all states.

We are not likely to return to the requirement of being male and owning property, which the founding fathers required of voters. Even those restrictions would be unlikely to keep citizens from voting on issues they knew nothing about.