# Mandatory Voting.
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [November 7, 2012, 9:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189 "2012-11-07T09:09:22Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 7
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/121 "2015-03-19T15:32:32Z")
Voting is a right. When you make it an obligation, it stops being a right. It figures that Obama wants to take away the right to vote.
---
### Author:  [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/122 "2015-03-19T15:46:31Z")
> [@Shodan](#):
>
> _:shrugs:_
>
> Obama seems to have noticed that his party got trounced recently at least in part because his supporters didn’t vote. So he is floating a trial balloon about forcing people to vote, in hopes that they will be mostly Democrats. It is the flip side of resistance to voter ID.
>
> It won’t go anywhere, nor should it. What are you gonna do, impose another “tax” on not voting like he did with not having health insurance? That will go well - people are too disadvantaged to get a state ID card, but they are not too disadvantaged to pay a fine.
>
> Regards,
> Shodan
“If you like your non-voting status, you can keep your non-voting status!”
---
### Author:  [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/123 "2015-03-19T15:49:30Z")
> [@Terr](#):
>
> Voting is a right. When you make it an obligation, it stops being a right. It figures that Obama wants to take away the right to vote.
Somewhere, a Professor of Logic is turning over in his grave.
---
### Author:  [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/124 "2015-03-19T15:52:51Z")
Making voting day a national holiday would be a much less obtrusive way to test the waters here, to see what it does to participation. It’d be better than forcing people who don’t want to participate to do so - you’d be giving better opportunity for people who want to be able to do to do so. We could create a new holiday or just switch one of those random ass holidays no one cares about.
And it would be a lot more palatable. Everyone would like a new holiday. Everyone would like it to be more convenient to vote. No one would be forced to get off their ass and do something they don’t want to do.
---
### Author:  [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/125 "2015-03-19T15:56:07Z")
I don’t like compulsory anything. Oregon is on the right track, automatically register everyone who is eligible (let them opt out if they wish) and do all elections by mail. Very easy.
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/126 "2015-03-19T16:01:11Z")
Back in 1896, Kansas City, Missouri, sought to make voting mandatory by assessing a fine against every male over the age of 21 who failed to vote in the general city-wide election.
(Actually, they did it via poll tax: the law said that every male over 21 is assessed a poll tax of $2.50, but if he votes he gets a certificate confirming he voted and that certificate “extinguishes” the poll tax for that year.)
The Supreme Court of Missouri in _Kansas City v. Whipple_, 38 S.W. 2d 295 (Mo. 1896) overturned the measure:
> [@](#):
>
> …the exercise of the elective franchise is established to be a duty, as well as a right or privilege – a concession which, for the purposes of this case, may be made, and yet the main proposition remains unestablished: i.e. that it is such a duty as may be enforced by compulsory legislation. The law is not always what it ought to be according to the views of many learned, thoughtful, and experienced publicists. It it is not every duty which a citizen in a republican government may owe to his fellow citizens and to his government that he can be constrained to perform. For the performance of many of these duties reliance must be placed only on the enlightened conscience of intelligent and patriotic freemen; for it is never to be forgotten that, while the citizens of this great republic are the subjects of government, whose duties as such may be enforced by the sovereign will, as expressed in the law of the land, they are also its sovereign; a sovereign, it is true, having but a single sovereign power – the power of the ballot – by the exercise of which, however, all other governmental powers and duties are created, and to which they are subordinate; and in the exercise of which alone does the citizen alone find his his prerogative of sovereignty in the normal operations of a representative republican government. . . . he must have the supreme and independent right of a sovereign to exercise it or not, else it ceases to be a sovereign right. \*\*That it is not within the power of any legislative authority, federal or state, to compel the citizen to exercise this sovereign right seems to have been the common understanding of our people from the beginning of our national existence. . . \*\*
(emphasis added)
---
### Author:  [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/127 "2015-03-19T16:01:42Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#):
>
> I think it’s incumbent on those who think it IS constitutional to show us where the constitution gives the feds the authority to do so. Remember, for the feds, it’s not: Everything not forbidden is allowed; it’s: Everything not authorized is forbidden.
>
> The only way I could see this being constitutional is for Congress to enact a tax for not voting. I supposed that is theoretically possible, but it is politically impossible. It would, however, be a “reverse poll tax” and that could have it’s own constitutional issues.
>
> The case would have to be made that the “manner” of the elections includes whether people have the right to not vote if they so choose. And that would only apply to Senators and Representatives. Here are the two relevant sections:
No one here said it IS constitutional. Your claim is that it’s not.
However, I do appreciate your cite, though as I read it says nothing at all that suggests that mandatory voting would be unconstitutional. Quite the opposite, in fact – it explicitly allows Congress to superceded any state laws except regarding “places”. So, if is constitutional for states to make voting mandatory, is is certainly constitutional for the Federal government to do so.
So maybe we can argue elsewhere about whether invidual states could do so.
---
### Author:  [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/128 "2015-03-19T16:07:23Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#):
>
> No one here said it IS constitutional. Your claim is that it’s not.
>
> However, I do appreciate your cite, though as I read it says nothing at all that suggests that mandatory voting would be unconstitutional. Quite the opposite, in fact – it explicitly allows Congress to superceded any state laws except regarding “places”. So, if is constitutional for states to make voting mandatory, is is certainly constitutional for the Federal government to do so.
>
> So maybe we can argue elsewhere about whether invidual states could do so.
It doesn’t say “law”, it says “Times, places, and manner”. I think it is quite a stretch to say that “manner” would include “mandatory”.
ETA: I see maybe where the confusion is. It does say “law”, but that is only in the sense that Congress can make a law to alter the “Times, Places and Manner”, except it can’t alter the “places”. It doesn’t say Congress can make any law it likes. The law would refer to the Times or the Manner, only.
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/129 "2015-03-19T16:15:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> The Supreme Court of Missouri in _Kansas City v. Whipple_, 38 S.W. 2d 295 (Mo. 1896) overturned the measure:
That’s actually 38 S.W. 295, not S.W. 2d.
Should have noticed there was no way Southwest Reporter in 1896 was on its second rotation. 🙂
---
### Author:  [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/130 "2015-03-19T16:16:04Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#):
>
> The only way I could see this being constitutional is for Congress to enact a tax for not voting.
Or a Constitutional Amendment. I assumed that’s what he was talking about.
---
### Author:  [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/131 "2015-03-19T16:23:26Z")
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> Back in 1896, Kansas City, Missouri, sought to make voting mandatory by assessing a fine against every male over the age of 21 who failed to vote in the general city-wide election.
>
> (Actually, they did it via poll tax: the law said that every male over 21 is assessed a poll tax of $2.50, but if he votes he gets a certificate confirming he voted and that certificate “extinguishes” the poll tax for that year.)
>
> The Supreme Court of Missouri in _Kansas City v. Whipple_, 38 S.W. 2d 295 (Mo. 1896) overturned the measure:
>
> (emphasis added)
Let me know when the **US** Supreme Court weighs in. And I have to believe there are better means available than to tax everyone and then rescind it for people who vote.
I am not personally endorsing this proposition. I was just responging to the claim that it’s “almost certainly” unconsitutional, and what I’ve seen of the replies is not very convincing to me.
I really like the idea of a voting holiday – so long as they still allow liquor sales. 🙂
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/132 "2015-03-19T16:25:45Z")
For those that are wondering about more modern precedent…
… I haven’t unleashed the heavy artillery of research efforts, but a moderate effort reveals no other caselaw on this point in any state or the federal courts.
The Missouri Supreme Court claims, in Whipple:
> [@](#):
>
> The municipality of Kansas City in this enactment seems to have been the pioneer and and sole adventurer into this field of legislation in this country since the Revolution.
That’s not completely true. A Harvard Law Review draft cites statutes in Virginia and Georgia in the eighteenth century that existed but were never enforced. North Dakota and Massachusetts, according to this same source, both amended their state constitutions around 1900 (post-Whipple) to allow mandatory voting laws to be enacted, but their respective legislatures never actually used the power to enact such laws. So far as I can ascertain, _Whipple_ is the only example in the country of such a measure actually facing judicial scrutiny.
---
### Author:  [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/133 "2015-03-19T16:38:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> Back in 1896, Kansas City, Missouri, sought to make voting mandatory by assessing a fine against every male over the age of 21 who failed to vote in the general city-wide election.
>
> (Actually, they did it via poll tax: the law said that every male over 21 is assessed a poll tax of $2.50, but if he votes he gets a certificate confirming he voted and that certificate “extinguishes” the poll tax for that year.)
>
> The Supreme Court of Missouri in _Kansas City v. Whipple_, 38 S.W. 2d 295 (Mo. 1896) overturned the measure:
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > \*\*That it is not within the power of any legislative authority, federal or state, to compel the citizen to exercise this sovereign right seems to have been the common understanding of our people from the beginning of our national existence. . . \*\*
>
> (emphasis added)
Did the Missouri Supreme Court say that mandatory voting violated either the Missouri or the US Constitution? “That’s not the common understanding” is not the same thing.
I can certainly see that the President could not establish mandatory voting by executive order, but (_pace_ **John Mace** ) I don’t see how Congress is constrained from changing the manner of voting from “optional” to “mandatory”.
It would be, like many ideas, stupid and counter-productive but not un-Constitutional.
Regards,
Shodan
---
### Author:  [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/134 "2015-03-19T17:05:24Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#):
>
> Bumped.
>
> President Obama seems open to mandatory voting: [http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/19/politics/obama-mandatory-voting/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/19/politics/obama-mandatory-voting/index.html)
I believe voting should be done by educated voters. Voters who have made an attempt to educate themselves on the issues. They can read newspapers, political party hand bills, mailings, listen to pundits, news media, family, friends, clergy, circus performers, or baristas. The assumption is that the voters have a personal interest in the issues, and a desire to vote.
Mandatory voting ensures that even the people who can not normally be bother to learn about the issues, or candidates, MUST go to the polls and vote. They are then free to pick all of the names that start with “B”, or end in “ski”, or sound Muslim, or are listed last, or any other damn fool method they may chose. It’s no longer a patriotic duty, but an annoying requirement.
I’m sure Obama is probably unaware of all the facts, but many voters may chose to vote against the party which forced them to waste their time going to the polls.
---
### Author:  [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/135 "2015-03-19T17:10:17Z")
> [@doorhinge](#):
>
> I’m sure Obama is probably unaware of all the facts, but many voters may chose to vote against the party which forced them to waste their time going to the polls.
I doubt that. A liberal voter may resent being forced by the liberal party to go to the polls, but once he’s there in front of the voting machine, he’ll see the liberal candidates vs. conservative candidates…and vote for the liberal ones. At that point, resentment about being forced to vote is probably out of mind.
---
### Author:  [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/136 "2015-03-19T17:13:45Z")
It seems to me that a useful comparison would be the mandatory census. If we want to make a better democracy it would be useful to get a better handle on what all the no-shows were thinking.
---
### Author:  [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/137 "2015-03-19T17:23:41Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#):
>
> Let me know when the **US** Supreme Court weighs in. And I have to believe there are better means available than to tax everyone and then rescind it for people who vote.
>
> I am not personally endorsing this proposition. I was just responging to the claim that it’s “almost certainly” unconsitutional, and what I’ve seen of the replies is not very convincing to me.
>
> I really like the idea of a voting holiday – so long as they still allow liquor sales. 🙂
Constitutional scholar [Lyle Denniston](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyle_Denniston) wrote on the topic of mandatory voting back in 2011:
[Constitution Check: Could voting be made mandatory?](http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2011/11/constitution-check-could-voting-be-made-mandatory/)
> [@](#):
>
> No doubt, a nationwide move to force Americans to vote, using whatever mechanism was available to enforce the requirement, would violate the Constitution as it exists today.
He states that there would be issues under the Fourteenth Amendment (abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens, assuming not voting is a privilege); and again as an equal protection claim under the 14th if one state opts for mandatory voting and another does not.
There could even be a 13th Amendment (involuntary servitude) claim that could be raised against compulsory voting.
And though I am not a lawyer, I could envision a 1st Amendment claim that being compelled to vote is requiring me to take action that effectively speaks in favor of a process (the whole voting process) that I may not wish to support. In essence it is an argument that casting a “None of the Above” ballot is not sending the same message as not participating at all.
Denniston goes on to state that mandatory voting could likely be accomplished by Constitutional amendment. Several other amendments address voting issues.
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/138 "2015-03-19T17:44:00Z")
Denniston doesn’t really point to any constitutional provision that supports his argument, though. That’s usually a bad sign. The “involuntary servitude” argument is ridiculous, inasmuch as voting is far less intrusive than jury duty and not even slightly analogous to military service. Nor is there a colorable free speech argument, inasmuch as filing a tax return is mandatory even though a return is arguably an endorsement of the taxing regimen lots of people hate.
> [@Shodan](#):
>
> Did the Missouri Supreme Court say that mandatory voting violated either the Missouri or the US Constitution? “That’s not the common understanding” is not the same thing.
>
> I can certainly see that the President could not establish mandatory voting by executive order, but (_pace_ **John Mace** ) I don’t see how Congress is constrained from changing the manner of voting from “optional” to “mandatory”.
The Missouri Constitution only.
> [@](#):
>
> On the contrary, in the spirit of the construction we have placed upon this right, our organic act in another article declares that, “no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.” Art. 2, sec. 9, Const. of Mo. How can a citizen be said to enjoy the free exercise of the right of suffrage who is constrained to such exercise, whether he will or not, by a penalty?
>
> Kan. City v. Whipple, 136 Mo. 475, 484, 38 S.W. 295, 297 (1896)
Unlike the Missouri Constitution, the federal Constitution does not guarantee the “free exercise of the right of suffrage” (other than on the basis of race, color, previous condition of servitude or sex.)
So there appears to be nothing in our Constitution which prohibits such a move. The flip side is that there is nothing in our Constitution that authorizes it, either.
---
### Author:  [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/139 "2015-03-19T18:00:33Z")
> [@Velocity](#):
>
> I doubt that. A liberal voter may resent being forced by the liberal party to go to the polls, but once he’s there in front of the voting machine, he’ll see the liberal candidates vs. conservative candidates…and vote for the liberal ones. At that point, resentment about being forced to vote is probably out of mind.
The term _liberal voter_ suggests that the voter has some understanding of the issues. At least enough of an understanding that they identify themselves as liberal.
Under the Obama plan, the non-voters who don’t give a shit what the government says, or does, as long as the government leaves them alone, will now be forced to the polls to vote. And they will do so with only the nations best interests in their hearts. :rolleyes:
---
### Author:  [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)
#### Post date: [March 19, 2015, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189/140 "2015-03-19T18:03:31Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#):
>
> 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?
Most people who _do_ vote are the sort I’d rather not have voting.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189.md?page=6)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mandatory-voting/640189.md?page=8)