Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Compulsory Voting: For and Against
Should voting be compulsory
Why should voting not be mandatory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Compulsory Voting: For and Against
There is an argument in the article “Telling Americans to Vote, or Else”, that is written by William A. Galston. The article states that voting should be necessary for everyone. The author contrasts American voting with Australian voting. In the text, it says,
But consider Australia, whose political culture is closer to that of the United States than that of any other English-speaking country…Australia adopted mandatory voting in 1924, backed by small fines…for nonvoting, rising with repeated acts of nonparticipation. The law established permissible reasons for not voting, like illness and foreign travel, and allows citizens who faced fines for not voting to defend themselves.
This statement proves that Australia has similar political
culture to America. Although, in Australia, voting is mandatory, whereas in America it’s not. In addition, in Australia, if citizens don’t vote, they will face charges, unless a valid reason has been given, whereas in America there is no rule toward not voting. The author gives myriad reasons on the importance to vote. The author describes in the article that it represents the decision of most citizens, is impartial, democracy cannot be powerfully if the citizenship is weak, and other reasons to support his statement. Overall, the author argues on the beneficial of voting and compares it to Australia, where it is required to vote.
In the wake of the 2016 general election, Michael Lind published a piece on The Smart Set entitled: Can Electoral Reform Save America? This piece centered around a single question on the ballot of a single state, question 5 in Maine, and the impact on electoral reform it could have for the country according to Lind. Using deconstruction, Lind analyzes the idea of a Ranked Choice polling system, rather than the first-past-the-post system that is currently in place in the United States. His allusions to the past as well as separate government entities globally, as well as a deconstruction of both polling systems and the impact they have (or could have) allows the reader to absorb information and produce their own personal opinion.
Katie, Beck. 2013. "Australia election: Why is voting compulsory?" BBC News, August 26. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-23810381 (March, 2015).
"There is a reason for the country to embrace mandatory voting, and it may be the most compelling: democracy cannot be strong if citizenship is weak," _William A. Galtson_. Mandatory voting, or compulsory voting, is a law wherein citizens are required to vote, or suffer the consequence. Australia has had compulsory voting since putting it into effect in 1924. "The turnout of Australian elections has never fallen below 90 percent since the introduction of compulsory voting in 1924," _Australian Electoral Commission_. Achieving over 90 percent of the citizens voting for nearly a century shows that mandatory voting is working in regard to getting people to vote. Governments should have mandatory voting because the people will educate themselves
Should we have the freedom to chose weather we vote or not? Currently the United States allows citizens not to vote, but some believe that this makes our politics undemocratic. Some think forcing people to vote is against the freedoms we have today. In the following essay, I will give the views of Arend Lijphart and Austin Ranney about these topics.
Australia has one of the oldest systems of compulsory voting, and arguably the most efficient (Hill, 2010). Compulsory enrolment at the federal level was introduced in 1911 this later became mandatory voting in 1924 (Hill, 2010). Mandatory voting was introduced in Australia to combat the problem of low voter turnout and it was successful in doing so; 59% turnout in 1922 surged to 91% in 1925 after the first federal election (Hill, 2010). “Australia never had a rights culture understood in the classical liberal sense of individualized rights” (Hill, 2010. Pg.428). Australia was unified in 1901 and shortly after compulsory voting became mandate. The citizen’s of Australia have never known a...
I came to America in the year of 1994; I was born in Iraq during the regime of Saddam Hussein. My argument is a positive point of view of the American Government, because I grew up in a place where we did not have freedom. When my family came to America, we were able have opportunities that we were never able to have. As you know the concept of “democracy is a complicated” (Models of Democracy 1). On the first page of American Democracy in Peril by William E. Hudson, the book often brings up the exact definition of the government or the word democracy. For example, he brought up two interesting perspectives of the idea of democracy in America one is “the dictionary definition, “government (or rule)” (1). One point of view he brings up is what does “government” or “rule” truly mean, does it mean government is made by the people, and that all people of the government are directly
Dubner and Levitt make their argument by first taking the reader through their own thought process of why people vote in the first place. They came up with three possibilities. First, that some people still believe they can effect an election. Second, maybe people vote in the same idea that they play the lottery, for the fun and spirit of winning on such a slim margin. Third, some people have the idea that voting is our civic duty, and they’ll feel guilty for not voting. Getting into why people vote shows the reader that voting is really not that important. If the reader just recently voted, they would look at this and realize why they actually voted, and understand more where Dubner and Levitt are coming
First, one reason why Americans should be required to vote is that it will educate the citizens. Evidence supporting this reason is in “Unequal Participation: Democracy’s Unresolved Dilemma, American Political Science Review” Aaron Lijphart stated that “By compelling people to vote, we are likely to arouse in them an intelligent interest and to give them a political knowledge that do not at present possess.” This evidence helps explain why Americans should be required to vote because when citizens are required to vote it gives them a political understanding that they didn't have before voting. Most citizens will research
To enforce voting to be mandatory , this will prompt more Americans to pay attention to the choices for their representatives. Mandating would stimulate the demand side, motivating voters to understand and acknowledge who they are voting for. Therefore , voting is to be a responsibility than a option.
One reason why Americans should not be required to vote is sometimes people can be irresponsible. Evidence supporting this reason is in, (“Must You
During the year of 1870, on the 3rd day in the month of February, the 15th amendment was ratified. The 15th amendment prohibits the denial of the right to vote based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Basically, giving all United States citizens the equal right to vote. Thousands of brave men and women have made the ultimate sacrifice to defend the United States constitution that holds our rights. Not to mention all the hard work from several people it took to pass congress. So why not make voting mandatory? Mandatory voting will benefit the United States citizens by allowing everyone to exercise their rights, therefore, entitling us to have a say in the electoral process, possibly making a change to improve our country.
In fact, according to Elections Canada, during the 2011 federal elections, only 61.1% of Canadians exerted their duty as citizen. Hence, some think compulsory voting can remediate the situation. However, mandatory voting is what really could hurt democracy. By forcing every eligible voter to go to the polls, misinformed voters will randomly cast their ballot. Sceptics may believe that by fining individuals who refuse to go to the polls, there will be less ignorant voters. For example, in Australia, where voting is compulsory, Australians who do not cast their ballots have to “pay a 20$ penalty” (Australian Electoral Commission). However, by financially penalising citizens who do not exert their duty, many will be so dissatisfied by the incumbent government that they will simply vote for a party that would not make voting an obligation. These people would ignore the party’s other policies instead of being informed on all the challenges that the country faces and how each party plans on solving them. Nonetheless, the elections are an occasion to elect a leader whose ideologies on many aspects, from immigration to the environment, matches the voter’s most. As a responsible voter, one has to know the policies of each party and has to try to obtain enough “social-scientific knowledge to [assess] these positions” (Brennan 11), which takes a lot of time. Therefore, compulsory voting would make voters more informed, but only on a narrow aspect while ignoring the other issues that should be taken into consideration when choosing the party they will vote for. All in all, mandatory voting would hurt democracy despite the higher participation
Over the recent year’s American voters have brought back a way of voting that was used during the country’s old age of existence, this rediscovered act is known as early voting. Early voting started in the early 1990s, though the outcome has not had such a high consistency over the years it is still recommended to help the Election Day process in the country. Since voter turnout is not entirely consistent due to the process being constantly shortened by state laws, the argument against early voting is that it is a waste of taxpayers’ money, opponents believe it is ineffective. Although that is not the case, in his 2016 blog article, “A Brief History of Early Voting,” Michael McDonald inform readers on the brief history of early voting as he states how the rates of voters who has cast their ballots before election day has increased over the years, “from less than a tenth to about a third” (qtd. in McDonald) since the 1990s. This proves to show why the money being spent on this act is not simply being wasted. Although early voting has
The film, Swing Vote shows a comparison to patronage due to the fact that the presidential candidates involved in the movie did what ever was in their power to convince Bud to vote for them. The story told within the movie Swing Vote was about an irresponsible father who did not get to vote because the power shut down as his daughter was casting his vote. Later that same night after the voting incident occurred, government officials arrived at his home to inform him that his vote had not go through and that he had to chance to recast it for whoever he would like. Both of the Presidential candidates find out that the fate of the United States president lays in the hands of a man named Bud Johnson in Texaco, New Mexico. Greenleaf and Boone begin
As a core value of democracy, compulsory voting increases the legitimacy of elected representatives, allowing the power to reside with the citizens and ensuring those candidates who win seats reflect the majority of people’s ideals. Since the introduction of compulsory voting at a federal level in 1924, the turn out rate of elections has not dropped below 90 percent, demonstrating that Australia’s political system reflects a near perfect model of democratic representation (AEC, 2011; Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2010; Evans, 2006, p. 5). Consequently, without compulsory voting “Australian democracy would likely be experiencing the same crisis of citizenship experienced in most other advanced democracies,” where a low, and often unequal voter turn out would predict the government, ultimately decreasing the value of government legitimacy (Louth and Hill, 2005, p.30).... ... middle of paper ...