Mandatory voting is when citizens are obliged to vote in elections. The main benefit of mandatory voting is an increase in voter turnouts. However it is often misunderstood; quantity does not give you quality. You might think a 100% turnout will make the government 100% legitimate and it will show a full representation of the country. In other words, a true “democracy”. But this is not the case. There are always random votes, protest votes and abstentions which do not contribute to improved legitimacy of the government. There is a reason why people don’t vote, and why they are less politically active. They don’t know, or simply don’t care about politics. Therefore their forced input does not in anyway add legitimacy to the mix. Mandatory voting …show more content…
Australia is one of the countries known for having an increasingly high voter turnout, and an admirable participation rate. However many other statistics show that they are considerably disengaged from politics and becoming more so. Paula Matthewson, a freelance communication advisor and writer on politics, previously stated statistics in her recent article on abc.net that shows how the engagement of Australian citizens are actually decreasing. In the 2010 federal election, the informal votes was the highest its ever been since 1984. However it was the level of intentional informal votes that rose, now representing nearly half of all informal votes. The rate of blank ballots doubled, and the proportion of informal votes covered with scribbles, slogans, or other protest marks also increased. In fact this has been on the rise since 1993. In 2010, a million Australians enrolled to vote simply did not bother to go to the polling booth, and another 1.4 million eligible voters were missing from the electoral roll altogether. In summary of all the statistics she has found, it is shown; “ Within Australia's supposedly optimal and indisputably preferable mandatory voting system, an estimated 3.2 million Australians, or 21% of eligible adults were either not on the electoral roll, did not turn up to vote, or lodged an informal vote. That is equivalent to 33 federal seats. Which also represents $7million in electoral funding that never made it to political party
In Document D, it tells us that although Italy has a compulsory voting system in place, it “ranks low” in political satisfaction among western countries. In addition, many voters have “unfavorable attitudes towards their electoral system”. When citizens are required to vote, their attitudes towards voting can become negative. In addition, in places like the US, where voting is optional, voters have the “highest voter satisfaction rates with their political institutions”. So, citizens are much happier with their government when they are given the choice to vote, not when they are forced to do it. The government doesn’t want their citizens to be unhappy; in the past, unhappy citizens has lead to revolts against the government. Citizens being unhappy about compulsory voting is shown in Document E. In Peru, citizens are required to vote and will receive a penalty of US$35 if they do not vote. Because of this penalty, 13% of ballots cast are blank or null. These citizens either “spoiled” their ballots or refused to vote for any of the candidates. It is clear that these citizens were unhappy about being forced to vote and they were unhappy about the penalty for not voting, so they voted, but they voted by casting ballots that were blank or null. Is it really better to have citizens that vote when they are submitting blank or null ballots? No. If citizens are so against voting that they will submit blank or null ballots, they should just be allowed to not
Since the turn of the twenty first century, in Canada voter turnout has made a significant and consecutive decline. In the last five federal elections on average only sixty-one per cent of eligible voters voted. If each eligible citizen voted in an election the government would be on par with the primary interests of the people. The easiest way to achieve this objective is by implementing a compulsory voting system. Mandatory voting systems are appealing because all citizens are affected by decisions made by the government, so it makes sense to have all those affected apart of the election process. As a result, the voting results would be more representative of the country and that would lead to an increase of stability and legitimacy. It would also be beneficial to Canadians because would cause political parties to address and focus on the needs of every socio-economic level. However, one of biggest problems that accompanies mandatory voting laws is that the choice to exercise the right to vote is taken away. Another primary concern about compulsory voting is that a large number of uninterested and uninformed voters are brought to the polls. Conversely, uninformed voters will become familiar with and learn the polling procedures and electoral system over time and uninterested voters are not forced to mark a name on the ballot. Compulsory voting laws would only make registration and attendance at the polls mandatory, not voting itself. Therefore the freedom to exercise the right to vote or not is still intact. A greater emphasis on alternate voting practices may be established such as electronic or online voting. Positive changes would not only be evident in the policies of political parties but also in the voting procedure. Th...
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
There is a way that is already put in use to increase voter turnout in Australia is to make voting mandatory. People in Australia are forced to vote or they will be fined, or even jailed if they do not vote repeatedly. It is very effective in term of improving voter turnout; however, there is still some argument against it. One of them being people would only vote because they have to, so they are ignorantly voting for the candidates just to be done with it. I completely agree with this idea. The voter turnout can be really high, but it would be meaningless if the people just vote to escape from the punishments. Yale Law School Professor Stephen Carter also suggested that, instead of punishing people do not vote, we should reward people who vote. It is the same with the mandatory voting. I think it will only be effective in increasing the voter turnout, but the results will not. People should vote voluntarily for the best and fair outcome. To have more people voting, I believe we should take a look at why people do not vote. We must assure people that if everybody thinks their vote does not count, then no one would vote. We should be able to change their attitude about their own votes. If people cannot vote because they are busy with work or schools, we should have a national day off on the election day. By doing so, much more people will be able to participate in voting. There should also be
Pammett, Jon, and Lawrence LeDuc. 2003. Explaining the Turnout Decline in Canadian Federal Elections: A New Survey of Non-Voters. Ottawa: Elections Canada.
Firstly, the idea of compulsory voting that involves every citizen having a civic duty, rather then a right to vote, which has been introduced in over 20 countries worldwide, a good example being Australia. In Australia, the system has been a success, producing an impressive turnout of 94% in the 2013 election, which therefore means that the Australian government will have a much higher level of legitimacy compared to the UK. However, critics of compulsory voting argue that such a system is undemocratic by itself as it does not provide a citizen with a choice on whether to vote or not, resulting in a serious debate around the issue. However, I must agree with the critics of the system, as the people voting because they have to, are likely to be less passionate and well informed about the person they have to
How must these concerns be addressed? Many turn to compulsory voting for answers, believing in its necessity and insisting on the need for compulsion in order to increase the low turnout percentage. In fact, legislation such as Bill S-22 has received introduction into parliament in the past. Though failing to achieve approval when proposed in the 1st Session of the 38th Parliament, which ended in November of 2005 ("Bill S-22 (Historical)"), it strove to “make it compulsory for an elector to exercise the right to vote,” “make it an offence for an elector not to vote,” and “add the words ‘None of the candidates’ to a ballot in order to allow an elector to indicate that the elector does not wish to vote for any of the candidates nominated in his or her electoral district” ("Bill S-22, Summary").
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
Among the many ways Americans can participate in politics, voting is considered one of the most common and important ways for Americans to get involved. The outcome of any election, especially at the national level, determines who will be making and enforcing the laws that all Americans must abide by. With this in mind one might assume that all Americans are active voters, but studies show the voter turnout is actually astonishingly low. With this unsettling trend it is important to know what statistics say about voter turnout as was as the four major factors that influence participation: Socioeconomic status, education, political environment, and state electoral laws, in order to help boost turnout in future elections.
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.
Pammett, J., & LeDuc, L. (2003). Explaining turnout decline in Canadian federal elections: A survey of non-voters. Elections Canada, 40.
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
In America, political candidates go against one another in a process known as an election in which citizens vote for the next person who "best" fits the position. In addition, there are various amounts of debates on whether a citizen should be compelled to vote. Although some argue if citizens should be required by law to vote, there are exceeding an amount of disadvantages.
America’s low voter turnout has been attributed to the political parties’ failure to enliven the potential voters with the awareness and competitiveness in elections and the overall difficulty of the registration and voting process. The research portion of this project was predominantly provided from four books focused on voter turnout, whether it was perceived to be increasing or decreasing. The article was found using one of the books and altogether the sources provided analytical and institutional perspectives on American voter turnout. I believe voter turnout, along with voter registration, is steadily declining in America due to multiple factors, though the topics touched on above are largely impacting us today.