Throughout the ages, governments and communities, like the Puritans, Greeks, and Romans, have thrived on civic virtues and placed high value in one’s duty to community. Although civic virtues are important for community success, the government should not make voting mandatory because doing so is not promoting civic virtues, but rather forcing them and inhibiting rights. If a person is forced to have a virtue, a right is taken away, and the virtue is no longer a virtue. A man cannot be good if he is never allowed to choose bad. According to both John Locke and Thomas Jefferson, the government gets its powers from the consent of the governed. Therefore, if the government gets power directly from the people, it would make no sense for the government to force the people to give it authority through mandatory voting. In order for someone to possess a virtue, it has to be through his own choice. Force takes the virtue out of virtue.
Making voting mandatory goes against some of the basic rights and freedoms American citizens have possessed from the creation of this nation. The 1st Amendment of the Constitution reads, “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech” (Fox, Pope 364). Americans have the freedom to speak or not to speak. Forcing a person to
…show more content…
The Greek’s freedom lay in their ability to participate in and influence politics. It was their honor and their privilege, and it was promoted by the government. Like the Greeks, in order to increase participation in American politics, the solution should not be force, but instead addressing the basis of the dilemma: people’s motivation, desire, and ability. Rather than forcing people to speak against their will, the government should instead encourage and promote, not constrain people to vote. Promoting this healthy civic virtue can be done in schools and at home, but ultimately the choice to participate in civic activity lies with the
On the national civics assessment, “two-thirds of 12th graders scored below ‘proficient’…and only 9 percent could list two ways a democracy benefits from citizen participation” (O’Connor and Romer 4). The information provided clarifies just how little students know about democracy. Without education on the subject, they are unaware as to how their government contribution is beneficial and why it is needed in the first place. The students, because of their lack of understanding, therefore choose to not take part in their government and fail to carry out their duties as a citizen. The authors provide more research that shows “the better people understand our history and system of government, the more likely they are to vote and participate in the civic life” (O’Connor and Romer 8).
In document C, John W. Dean who was legal council the the U.S. President Richard M. Nixon said, “While compulsion of any kind is a restriction, so is the compulsion to drive only on the right side of the road. Requiring citizens to vote is no more restrictive than requiring them to register for the draft. And it is far less restrictive than requiring us, for example, to attend school; to serve on juries, possibly for weeks or months at a time; to pay taxes; or to serve in the military when drafted”(Dean). That shows the multitude of laws or requirements in America that are less important than voting, but are required. Voting is for the good of the country, yet people won't vote, but won't bat an eye when they are forced into jury duty.
The most critiqued argument is that mandating voting is just un-American. The con side argues that forcing people to vote violates our freedom of speech. But they don’t feel that the requirement to pay taxes and serve as a jure are unjust. This seems contradictory. The second argument is that requiring all citizens to vote would result in many uninformed and carelessly voters. They continue this argument by stating many people would cast “donkey votes” which are votes for a random candidate because they are required to vote by law. There are many arguments for and against compulsory voting but it comes down to what makes something
Without mandatory voting, some people chose not to vote because they do not care, or are uninformed. Forcing these people to vote could lead to random choices when voters do not take responsibility to study the candidate's position on specific topics. "It may increase the number of informal votes, ballot papers which are not marked according to the rules for voting," _ Matt Rosenberg_. Compulsory voting may lead many people to not truly vote, but to put their name on a ballot and turn it in. While this is possible, a greater number of potentially interested people would also vote. If people are required to vote, the country will obtain every eligible voters’ opinions. Some of the citizens may not care who is elected, but they still can have a say if they want to. Without mandatory voting, the people who do not want to vote, do not and went about with their life. "Because a majority of the voters are turning out to cast ballots, the formation of the government can be a more accurate reflection of what the population of any nation wants," _Asia-Pacific Economics_. In a government with two different parties, the majority of the citizens decide how they want the government to be formed till the next election.
Throughout history there have been significant debates, theories and agendas set forward as to what the best form of government is. Many of those individuals and groups who have written on the topic have their critics because they offer points that are highly controversial in theory and problematic when put into practice. John Locke and Publius, which is the collective name for Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, both published essays with regards to the nature of government and largely championed the notion of democracy. With Locke writing on constitutional government in England and Publius writing on and essentially establishing governmental mechanisms in the United States, both parties inspired the rise of liberalism and democratic government in the modern world (Tinder, 67). However, there are questions to be asked of them and indeed comparisons to be made. This essay will examine the arguments set forth by Publius and Locke with a view to proving that they do indeed champion strong government and arguably exclude arbitrary governmental traits that may constrain attempts to do what is best for the individual rather than the people as a whole. In effect, the constraints they put in place in their texts established a balance of power that had its limits and weaknesses but ultimately appeared to be fair.
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
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.
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.
The United States of America is often known for having more freedom than anywhere else. As Gandhi said, “A ‘no’ uttered from the deepest conviction is better and greater than a ‘yes’ uttered to please, or what is worse, to avoid trouble.” Freedom of speech is a big part of the American culture and citizens are encouraged to speak their minds and opinions openly. It is such an important aspect of each American individual that it is
who can speak and what they can say, the first Amendment rights of all of us are
Between the years of 508 BCE and 322 CE, Greece flourished under democracy. However, some question if the flourishing of Athens is due to the democracy that was in place as opposed to other factors relevant in building a successful community. This investigation will examine the effectiveness of Athenian democracy in Greek society. Relevance of Athenian democracy can be seen in foundation of many democracies found worldwide. In this investigation the right to vote, protection of minorities, use of social class, the structure of democracy and how Greek democracy has influenced the world will be addressed. The place investigated will be Greece, specifically the capitol Athens. The effectiveness of Athenian democracy can be seen in social structure, protection of minorities, and right to vote, as well as its structure and influence of other countries around the world.
In the fifth-century BC, Athens emerged as one of the most advanced state or polis in all of Greece. This formation of Athenian ‘democracy’ holds the main principle that citizens should enjoy political equality in order to be free to rule and be ruled in turn. The word ‘democracy’ originates from the Greek words demos (meaning people) and kratos (meaning power) therefore demokratia means “the power of the people.” The famous funeral speech of Pericles states that “Our constitution is called democracy because power is in the hands not of a minority but of the whole people.” However, only citizens (free adult men of Athenian descent) could participate in political matters. Women and slaves held no political rights, although they were essential in order to free up time for the citizens to participate in the matters of the state. The development of Athenian democracy has been fundamental for the basis of modern political thinking, although many in modern society UK would be sceptical to call it a democracy. Plato and Aristotle in The Republic and The Politics respectively were critical of the Athenian democracy, by examining the culture and ideology present the limitations and possible downfalls of a democratic way of life. Within this essay I will outline these limitations and evaluate their validity.
Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed upon, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way. For government is an expedient, by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it.
..., Robert D. Putnam’s theory that civic culture is enough to sustain democracy is not accurate because situations like the backsliding of Weimar Germany away from democracy can happen even with the presence of a high civic culture. Instead of focusing on improving the numbers of people that a part of associational memberships, read newspapers and other media outlets, the number of people that turnout for national elections and the amount of informed voters there needs to be a focus on improving the quality of Civic Participation. There needs to focus on eliminating polarized cleavages within society and eliminating media bias in favor of bipartisan coverage in order to achieve the ‘right’ civic participation. There also needs to be a stable economy where people are not worried about not