Should voting be madatory in the US? I certainly think so. Jury duty is madatory. The draft is madatory. If you’re the witness in a criminal matter, testifying can be madatory. Is voting any less important than these?
(Quick side question: I was just wondering. Is voting madatory in any other locale? I know in the old USSR it may have been. But you only had *“one”*candidate on the ticket:dubious:. I’m talking about in free countries, with free and meaningful elections. And if they did, how did it work out?)
Yeah it’s compulsory in Australia but it is also incredibly easy to both register to vote and to actually vote in Australia. Mind you it is only necessary to turn up and have your name marked off. You can just submit a blank ballot if you don’t know or don’t care about the process.
Darn it! I did a quick search on GD for “mandatory voting” (and I didn’t misspell it this time;)). I should have looked under Elections too. Oh, well. Anyways, my thread and my question is still slightly different though.
High voter turnout in a democracy is a sign of popular support for the government and can be used to legitimizes government authority. In no way should it be a obligation of the people but a privilege of the government that people vote. The burden is on the government to make the people desire to vote.
Governments that would use fear, punishment, guilt are using negative reinforcements to try to legitimize their power and on the way to a less free state.
I think it’s a fine idea in theory, and then I go stand in line at a Walmart somewhere, and realize I don’t want these people choosing my lunch for me, much less my lawmakers.
Sounds elitist, I know. But why should people who don’t know and don’t care be coerced into voting? What’s the benefit?
I don’t think so, too many people would vote without putting thought into the decision if it was something they had to do as opposed to something they were allowed to do. I know some people currently vote without thinking but at least they are interested in voting in the first place.
What makes you think your Walmart compatriots are not also voters? :dubious:
Anyways, the advantage is what don’t ask said in his post. In Australia, you don’t register as per your political affiliation. You register as an address, which means you vote in your electorate (or absentee if you happen to be travelling). You rock up on election day, have your name crossed off, vote for the party of your choice, then sit up that evening with a glass of Chardonnay and perving on Antony Green calling the election. Bliss!!
It means that most people have an interest in the election process, and for those who don’t give a stuff, they can vote informal or by voting for some of the fringe parties: ‘More Beer’ and the ‘Shagging Party’ come to mind.
But most people care enough to vote…we’re only 21 million people here, and in swinging seats, individual votes can actually count to make or break a candidate’s chances of winning. But regardless of those seats, making voting compulsory really gives citizens a reason to get an understanding of the political process, and an incentive to become informed about their candidates and policies.
Voting should be mandatory, and we need only simply include a box for “I choose to abstain from voting” and “I choose to vote for none of the candidates” On the ballot. In a meaningful democracy, every persons vote should be counted, not just those who can be arsed. While I despair over the general level of knowledge about candidates and issues, it is important to me that every single eligible voter is counted.
The sort of people who can’t be bothered to go vote are the sort of people I’d rather not have voting. How very convenient that they already exclude themselves. It’s one of the few little elegant things in life that works itself out.
What problem would forcing them back into the system solve?
I can’t see the benefit. In the UK we have mandatory voter registration, so everybody who isn’t purposefully trying to avoid it has the ability to vote. But if they can’t be bothered to get engaged in the democratic process, then I’m not that keen on them being forced to make some random tick on a sheet which might affect me.
I’m also not comfortable with government forcing people to do it – voting is about holding our lawmakers to account, not following their orders.
Accuracy in full representation of the public. Even if it changes nothing in the demographics and 30-40 % still choose to abstain they will have been on record as doing so, rather than simply unrecorded because they couldn’t show up for some reason. It eliminates laziness, apathy, and other minor problems that prevent people from casting a vote. This way the number of non-participants should be both lower and more accurately noted so that we might find out why over a quarter of our population regularly doesn’t give a shit about how it is governed.
But necesarily, people too lazy to vote are too almost certainly too lazy to be informed about the electoral process. You’re necesarily lowering the knowledge base and quality of the voting electorate and for what reason? To force people into a system they don’t want to be in? Seems like all downside to me - you’re infringing on people’s right to be indifferent, and lowering the quality of the results at the same time. Lose lose all around.
