Should we encourage people to vote as much as we do(in the U.S.)?

[Mahaloth]

I'm not sure if this is a Great Debate, really, but it's political in nature so I'm putting it here(so take that!).

Like many of you, I've noticed that a signifigant percentage of people I meet and talk to know next to nothing about what is going on in the world or even in our own country. At the same time, many of them vote because....well, you're supposed to.

I remember election day 1996. The Detroit News(I live by there) had a photo on the front page of the Iwo Gima statue. It said as the headline, "If you don't vote, they died in vain."

Shouldn't a lot of people not vote, since they are uninformed? If you have to be reminded or prodded to vote, shouldn't that pretty much rule you out?

The campaign for voting really should say something more like, "If you vote uninformed, they died in vain." I mean, they didn't die so people could just go in and punch random holes(or whatever) based on how much they liked the candidates clothing or something. In fact, it's an insult to all who died to vote if you don't have the knowledge.

Am I alone in these ideas?

[Lissa]

You know, low voter turn-out has never really bothered me. I'd prefer it if those wh didn't know what or who they're voting for would just stay home on election day.

What bothers me is the political apathy in this country. Too many people ignore what's going on in the world around them unless they're directly affected by it. It seems that too many people have an incredibly short memory and lack the ability to see ahead and calculate how a decision will affect the future.

[akennett]

I would have to agree with both of the above posts. If you don't know what's going on, stay home - preferably to start learning for next year's elections.

I would like to see some way to know whether or not someone voted so when they start complaining about some current problem those of us who did vote can tell them to shut up. It really gets to me when people are complaining about something that politicians are doing, but when asked if they vote they say no, because 1 vote doesn't matter. The most recent Pres. election sure showed them wrong - a few more/less votes one way or the other in certain states (and not just Fla.) and that election could easily have turned out the other way.

Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on your viewpoint) it's going to stay the way it is for a long time. Those who can't be bothered to be informed most likely are not going to be bothered to vote - even in tight races. After all, one vote doesn't mean anything.

[Bob55]

Chechnya just had ~80% voter turnout, we could learn from them. Too much apathy in this country though, no one appreciates our freedom anymore. It's amazing to think how many died for our ability to vote...

[ElwoodCuse]

I've heard that voting is mandatory in Australia. Is this true? How is this enforced?

[ruadh]

Having just received my copy of the voter registration forms that are posted to all households in Ireland, I had to laugh when I saw this thread title. "As much as we do"? That's not very much anyway, by comparison.

[clairobscur]

Originally posted by ElwoodCuse
I've heard that voting is mandatory in Australia. Is this true? How is this enforced?

It's also mandatory in Belgium. If you don't vote, you may be (and actually are, I believe) fined.

[big_yellow_kingswood]

Originally posted by ElwoodCuse
I've heard that voting is mandatory in Australia. Is this true? How is this enforced?

yes and no.

If you are an Ausralian citizen, it is compulsory for you to be on the electoral role, and if you are on the electoral role, you are required to turn up on election day, have your name marked off and accept a ballot paper. You are supposed to then number the candidates on the paper in order of preference, but if you really don't like any of the candidates or want to exercise a right to 'not vote'* you can just put the paper unmarked into the ballot box. It's anonymous voting, so no-one would ever know. Unless you write your name on the ballot, which would informalise (disqualify) your vote anyway...

if you don't vote, you will be fined, as long as the Electoral Office (independant body that runs elections) can get a hold of you. If you're enroled at the wrong address it'll be pretty hard for them to find you. I think it's around $150, but I could be very wrong.

*a concept I've never understood as it would mean that you've wasted 1/2 a day turning up and piss-farting around for nothing.

[Aspidistra]

I (and Mr A) got fined $AU50 for not voting in the referendum on the republic (reason for not voting : we forgot)

We refer to the sum as our "stupidity tax"...

[welby]

I agree with the OP. It's amazing the number of people out there who vote along party lines because Mom and Dad voted that way, or because they haven't actually taken the time to explore the candidates position, or the issue under vote.

How would you change this, though? Many people think that the right to vote directly translates to a right not to vote. Granted, you've got the right, but only an idiot would exercise it.

[woolly]

At the last Australian federal election held on November 10, 2001 a total of 12,054,664 votes for the House of Representatives were recorded, giving a turnout of 94.85% (which has been pretty consistent since 1925). Of the votes cast 4.82% were informal (which is higher than average).

[BrotherCadfael]

People have a tendancy to assume that a low voter turnout is a Bad Thing, just because, well, it's bad. It indicates public apathy, or disgust, or something.

On the other hand, I've often theorized that a low voter turnout generally indicates relative contentment with the way things are going. For the most part, only the activists on both sides get really passionate about the particulars of who is in charge at any given moment; most of the public are reasonably happy with either.

Activists tend to exaggerate the importance of the specific issues in any given election. The public, in contrast, sees that whichever party wins, most of the activities of government will continue more or less as is, and this is just fine with them. This attitude, of course, drives the activists nuts.

The way to test this theory is to see what happens when the public (as opposed to just the activists) are unhappy. Surprise! Turnout goes way up. For example, when former Klansman David Duke ran for office in Louisiana, turnout went through the roof and his opponent won by a landslide. QED.

Most political commentators are partisan, which is to say activist, so of course they will bemoan low turnouts as a Bad Thing. But it doesn't necessarily mean that it is.

[Paranoid Randroid]

Originally posted by welby
How would you change this, though? Many people think that the right to vote directly translates to a right not to vote. Granted, you've got the right, but only an idiot would exercise it.

Whyever should I vote? Not only does my lone vote not matter numerically - even if it came down to a thousand votes - but I rarely, or never, see any candidates remotely near my political beliefs.

Do I want Bush running my country? Gore? What about Nader? Harry Browne, even? Pat Buchanan? Can I take a big 'none of the above'? Lesser of evils doesn't work for me.

'Sides, I don't drive, and if I don't register to vote, they've got no way to get me for jury duty. heheh.

[E-Sabbath]

Actually, that's not true anymore, Cheese. They use a lot of other records these days.

[Jackmannii]

"Should we encourage people to vote as much as we do (in the U.S.)?"

If you're referring to certain practices made famous in Chicago (i.e Vote early and often) I don't think encouraging people to do this is a good idea.

[Paranoid Randroid]

Originally posted by E-Sabbath
Actually, that's not true anymore, Cheese. They use a lot of other records these days.

Well, there goes my reason for living. Hrmph. Thanks for shattering a man's dreams.

[Mahaloth]

I think the key change should be this:

Instead of perpetuating the fabricated evil of not voting, we should perpetuate the real evil of not informing oneself or voting uninformed.

Oddly enough, that summed up my entire OP in much briefer fashion.

[caveman]

Originally posted by Jackmannii
"Should we encourage people to vote as much as we do (in the U.S.)?"

If you're referring to certain practices made famous in Chicago (i.e Vote early and often) I don't think encouraging people to do this is a good idea.

Chicago just needs to tone down the intensity of its "get out the vote" campaigns among the deceased electorate...

I think that the one-box "party line" vote should be abolished. At least make 'em think a little bit about who they're voting for...

[IzzyR]

I agree

Before the last presidential election, I heard an editorial from Andy Rooney on the subject. He ended off with something like "if you haven't really followed the issues, don't get out to vote on Tuesday. Just get out".