Since the 1890s, Canada’s voter turn-out has declined steadily, however, the decline in voter turn-out in the last several elections is one of great concern to Canada’s democracy. As a result, mandatory voting has gained the attention of many political scientists and political analysts. While there are good reasons to worry about Canadians’ diminishing voter turn-out, it is also fair to say that mandatory voting will not prove beneficial to the future of Canada’s democracy. Although mandatory voting will increase the voter turn-out, it will not create an informed voter base and neither raise a more politically knowledgeable society. Making voting compulsory is accompanied by both positive and negative outcomes, but in Canada, many fear that the negative outcomes outweigh the positives. Mandatory voting is the requirement to vote, or face a penalty (Bardeesy, 2011). Being forced to cast a ballot is not the solution to Canada’s voter turn-out. In fact, it might cause more problems for Canada as politics would become an election period routine. Also, if a higher voter turn-out is our goal, then mandatory voting is the correct approach, unfortunately, democracy is much more complicated than just a high turn-out. According to Alison Loat, the executive director of Samara, it is much more important to “figure out why …show more content…
In Canada, citizens have the choice to cast a ballot if they strongly believe in any political party. Voting is a right, but not a duty as citizens hold the right to refuse voting if they do not have any interest in the candidates or their parties (Liu, 2012). Furthermore, forcing citizens to vote could lead to protests in which voters will select a candidate without considering their plans, as they are voting to avoid penalties or fines. This will ultimately result in devaluing the Canadian vote, and lead to long-term harms for Canada’s
For a democratic country to thrive, they must have a proper electoral system in producing the party to oversee our government. Since its inception in 1867, Canada has been using the first past the post system during elections to decide their leading party. Although we have been using this system for an extended duration of time, the FPTP system is flawed and should be changed. The goal of this paper is to prove the effectiveness of shifting to more of a proportional system, while also exposing the ineptness of Canada’s current system. With other methods advancing and little change of the first past the post system, this system is becoming predated. A variation of the proportional electoral system is key because it empowers voters, increases voter turnout, and creates a more diverse environment. Canada should adopt a more proportionate electoral system at the federal level if we wish to expand democracy.
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...
John Adams once said "You will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it." For many generations, our ancestors have fought for the right to vote. It started with the Civil Rights Act in 1964 which made it mandatory that white schools integrate black children into their institutions. The outcome of the 1964 election was a landslide, favoring the democrats, which broached the issue of civil rights legislation. In 1964 “only 7% of eligible black citizens in Mississippi were registered; in Alabama the figure was 20% (Kernell, et. al 2014, 162). The low voter turnout rate was because people of color were required to take a literacy test. This all changed when President Johnson
"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
Pammett, Jon, and Lawrence LeDuc. 2003. Explaining the Turnout Decline in Canadian Federal Elections: A New Survey of Non-Voters. Ottawa: Elections Canada.
The electoral system in Canada has been utilized for over a century, and although it has various strengths which have helped preserve the current system, it also has glaringly obvious weaknesses. In recent years, citizens and experts alike have questioned whether Canada’s current electoral system, known as First Past the Post (FPTP) or plurality, is the most effective system. Although FPTP is a relatively simple and easy to understand electoral system, it has been criticized for not representing the popular vote and favouring regions which are supportive of a particular party. FPTP does have many strengths such as simplicity and easy formation of majority governments, however, its biggest drawback is that it does not proportionally represent
One may be surprised to learn that the turnout rate of individuals voting in Canada's federal elections has never reached 80% (Elections Canada). In fact, it has been decreasing since the middle of the twentieth century, as shown by an increase in voter apathy. An electoral system is designed to provide those who live in democratic governments with the opportunity to vote – in an election – for the candidate whose platform coincides with their political beliefs. This can be achieved through a direct democracy, where citizens are directly involved in the decision-making process, or through an indirect democracy, where citizens elect a delegate to act on their behalf. In a direct democracy, all citizens would be present during governmental meetings and have the opportunity to give verbal input. As one may expect, this would be extremely difficult to coordinate with Canada's population of 34.88 billion (Statistics Canada). Canada uses an indirect democracy, which allows for two basic forms of electoral systems in which representatives are elected. In the simple plurality electoral system, the candidate who receives the greatest number of votes is elected, regardless of a majority or not. It is commonly known as the “first-past-the-post” system, which alludes to a horse race; the winner passes the post with the highest number of votes, and only need to garner more votes than their opponents. The successful candidate wins all the seats in their riding or constituency while the candidates who places second or third will receive no seats, regardless of how many votes they lose by. Proportional representation is the second form of electoral system used in Canada; the percentage of the votes received by a party is proportionate to the numb...
However, the proposed systems must be thoroughly examined for their compatibility with Canada’s needs and their ability to resolve the issues outlined in this paper. From distortion in representation to Western alienation and to making the voices of minorities heard, the new system must also ensure that Parliament fulfills its role in representing, legislating, and holding the government. More importantly, after the current government abandoned its promise on electoral reform, it is important for researchers and future governments to build on the knowledge acquired by the Special Committee on Electoral Reform as well as previous experiences of the provinces with electoral
"Miller light and bud light…either way you end up with a mighty weak beer!" This is how Jim Hightower (a Texan populist speaker) described the choices that the U.S. electorate had in the 2000 elections. This insinuates that there is a clear lack of distinction between the parties. Along with numerous others, this is one of the reasons why the turnout is so low in the U.S. elections. In trying to explain the low figures at the U.S. elections, analysts have called American voters apathetic to indifferent to downright lazy. I disagree that the 50% (in recent elections) of voters that fail to turnout to vote are lazy and that they have just reason not too. I will also show that the problem lies within the system itself in that the institutional arrangements, electoral and governmental, do not create an environment that is conducive to mass participation. I will address these main issues and several others that have an effect on voter participation. In doing so I will compare America to other established democracies.
Should Canadians turn to compulsory voting for answers? Many democracies throughout the globe, including Australia, Belgium, Greece, and Luxembourg, employ mandatory voting and report an average turnout rate of 90 percent ("Canadian Parliamentary Review - Article"). In light of this, establishing electoral participation as a civic duty seems pretty reasonable. Particularly considering the guaranteed increase in voter participation, it seems like the perfect solution. When examined father in-depth, however, one will discover the issue poses some
A compulsory voting system similar to the one used in Australia is not a system Canada should implement. Compulsory voting in the context of a democratic society can be a misleading term (Lever, 2010). Canada practices the secret ballot process in voting, and so it is impossible to verify if someone has cast a legally valid ballot. If countries have a singular goal of simply increasing voter turnout, compulsory voting could remedy this problem and it should be more accurately defined as being compulsory voter turnout (Lever, 2010). The belief that compulsory voting inherently improves democracy is misleading (Lever, 2010). Canada should not force its citizen’s to vote because other then increasing voter turnout, compulsory voting would infringe on the right of the voter to not vote, it would not lead to a more informed or engaged population, the legitimacy of government would suffer, and the resources required to implement and maintain the compulsory voting system would be extremely costly to the federal government.
The issue of electoral reform has become more important than ever in Canada in recent years as the general public has come to realize that our current first-past-the-post, winner-take-all system, formally known as single-member plurality (SMP) has produced majority governments of questionable legitimacy. Of the major democracies in the world, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom are the only countries that still have SMP systems in place. Interestingly enough, there has been enormous political tension and division in the last few years in these countries, culminating with the election results in Canada and the USA this year that polarized both countries. In the last year we have seen unprecedented progress towards electoral reform, with PEI establishing an electoral reform commissioner and New Brunswick appointing a nine-member Commission on Legislative Democracy in December 2003 to the groundbreaking decision by the British Columbia Citizen’s Assembly on October 24, 2004 that the province will have a referendum on May 17, 2005 to decide whether or not they will switch to a system of proportional representation. This kind of reform is only expected to continue, as Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty decided to take BC’s lead and form an independent Citizen’s Assembly with the power to determine whether or not Ontario will have a referendum regarding a change to a more proportional system. There is still much work to do however, and we will examine the inherent problems with Canada’s first-past-the-post system and why we should move into the 21st century and switch to a form of proportional representation.
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 deficiency of the Canadian electoral system decreases the level of democracy in the Canadian constitution. Canadian citizens are known for being active in political matters; whether it relates to them specifically or not. In fact, “on average, educated, well informed, and interested in politics – all factors associated with high voter turnout.” But if this is the case, why is there a democratic deficit in the Canadian electoral system? The answer is simple: Most elections today rely heavily on media when it comes to national context; which decreases the l...
Pammett, J., & LeDuc, L. (2003). Explaining turnout decline in Canadian federal elections: A survey of non-voters. Elections Canada, 40.