While Sens. Joe Biden, D-Del., Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., Chris Dodd, D-Conn., John McCain, R-Ariz., and Barack Obama, D-Ill., certainly have reason to hedge their bets, their neglect of their constituents and American voters is unsettling.

According to The Washington Post’s database, McCain has missed an astonishing 53 percent of roll-call votes during the current Congress. Biden, Dodd and Obama as well as Reps. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., and Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., also have missed more than 25 percent of votes this year. These presidential contenders are able to float on a taxpayer-funded salary while disregarding the jobs they were elected to do.

Congressional seats have historically been steps toward the White House. But with campaigns kicking off earlier than ever, constituencies take a backseat to showboat politics. The voters who elected these individuals become underrepresented.

Also on Nov. 8, the Senate issued the first veto override of President Bush’s presidency. The Water Resources Development Act of 2007 authorizes $23.2 billion in projects including flood safeguards and drinking water protection. When issuing his veto, Bush stated WRDA does not adequately prioritize projects. The Senate voted 79-14, easily achieving the required two-thirds majority. This was only the 107th time Congress has overridden a presidential veto.

An override vote is a rare face-off between the legislative and executive branches. For Republicans, this decision also was a test of party loyalty. Yet all the presidential candidates in the Senate failed to vote. Even McCain, who strongly supported the president’s veto in a floor statement, abstained. Tancredo was absent from the corresponding House vote two days earlier. Candidates’ positions on this issue would have emphasized their opinions on the current administration and on the relationship between Congress and the White House.

Going on record with a vote is always risky territory. Mukasey’s future performance will reflect upon those who voted for and against him.

Such decisions can come back to haunt a campaign. Clinton, for instance, has taken heat for her position to send troops to Iraq in 2003. The permanence of such votes serves as incentive for policymakers to make educated and well-thought-out choices.

Unfortunately, not bothering to make the tough calls is a trend among candidates. Biden, Dodd, McCain and Obama missed a June cloture vote which would have quickly initiated a decision as to whether or not then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales still held the confidence of the Senate. Gonzales was criticized for his involvement in the controversial treatment of prisoners and questionable domestic surveillance policies. A vote on this measure also was a stance on those topics.

Reps. Ron Paul, R-Texas, and Tancredo did not vote on July’s H.R. 2956, which would have required most troops to be withdrawn from Iraq by April 1. Iraq war strategy is at the crux of nearly every presidential debate and speech. Nonparticipation in this vote created some uncertainty about Paul and Tancredo’s plans for Iraq.

Candidates rely on public ignorance each time they miss a vote. If we fail to hold them accountable for their absences, we just allow the disrespectful tactic to continue.

Each time a presidential contender references the strength of his or her voting record, it is the responsibility of American voters to check the facts. Abstaining from controversial votes is a cowardly attempt to please everybody. Being proven wrong in the future is one thing but not even showing up is disrespectful to the American people. Not every decision will be favored by the masses. If candidates can’t face this fact now, will they really be able to handle presidential pressures?

Alesa Mackool is a State News columnist and a journalism and political science junior. Reach her at mackoola@msu.edu.