More handpicked essays just for you.
Why shouldn't we make voting mandatory
Mandatory voting in america
Impact of social media on political participation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Why shouldn't we make voting mandatory
Many people argue if voting should be mandatory or not. Voting should not be mandatory. Making voting mandatory could cause a lot of problems with the outcome of the voting and how many voters actually have knowledge about the candidates. Some people think voting should be mandatory, so they can get everyone’s opinions in the vote. Making voting mandatory could affect the outcome of the elections in a negative way because it can go against the constitutional rights, and making people with no knowledge of the candidates could mess up the results. Compulsory voting could go against the people’s rights. Although Americans have the right to vote does not mean they have to exercise those rights. For example in “Critics Warn of the Violation of Civil Liberties” it says forcing people to participate in democracy can put democracy itself at risk. Not only does it go against their rights, but they would get a fine if they did not vote. Also, forcing citizens to vote takes a lot of time and money. The government would have to document everyone who did or did not vote, and they would have to find a punishment. Therefore, compulsory voting can go against people’s rights and cause extra, unnecessary work for the government. …show more content…
Forcing people like this to vote would probably just pick a candidate based on what the people they follow of social media believe or based on what they look like. For instance, in “Critics Warn of Violation of Civil Liberties” it says that a candidate chosen by uninformed citizens have no stronger mandate than one who wins an election in which only half the eligible voters participated. The voting should be left to the people who actually have knowledge about the candidates and
Recently, only 60% of registered voters have actually voted in presidential elections. This brings up the question: should Americans be required to vote? This question receives very mixed answers. Many Americans believe that they should have the choice and the freedom to vote or not; many Americans also believe that mandatory, or required, voting is simply a civic duty. Currently, American citizens are not required to vote. Citizens seem to like this system, but because voting is not mandatory, the amount of citizens that vote in elections is rather low. Americans should not be required to vote because it forces people to vote that are uninterested, makes citizens unhappy, and damages other people’s votes.
Should America have compulsory voting? In my opinion, compulsory voting is a good way to increase the voting turnout. People currently don't like to vote because they don't have the time, or are just too lazy. If the government gives them an incentive then they will be happy to take time off to vote. Also, a reason to fear not to vote should be installed, like an annoying fine. When only a few people vote, the voter satisfaction is low. But when everyone puts their idea in, the satisfaction rises because the actual majority will win.
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.
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
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
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.
As an American citizen do you think the government should enforce compulsory voting? A country usually needs three things to have a successful compulsory voting system, a national voter registration database, rewards to encourage voters, and punishing non-voters. Should americans be required to vote? There are three reasons why Americans should be required to vote, first, so citizens have interests and political knowledge, second, to increase amount of younger voters and finally, requiring people to vote is the least a citizen can do.
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.
Some Americans might believe that being able to vote and participate in presidential elections is one of the truest forms of democracy, but this is not the case. Not only are elections non-democratic, but also America itself is not a democracy. The truth is, some Americans dislike the way our political system functions
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
On the contrary, citizens should be required to vote. For example, text 1 line 20 states "A democracy can't be strong, if its citizenship is weak"; therefore when being forced to vote against our own will, it is to strengthen our nation. In addition, if the turnout rates are high, then political parties reaches out to the citizens. As a result, the voices of the less educated and the poorer Americans will be heard and not ignored. Not to mention, William A. Galston states that voting evens out the inequalities stemming from income, education, and age in text 1. Most importantly, mandatory voting only benefits us a nation and individually. Clearly, compulsory voting should be enforced.
Lisa Hill a professor at the University of Adelaide who spreads the yes, in mandatory voting, “If voting were mandatory in the U.S., people would be inspired to pay more attention to campaigns... ” (Junior Scholastic). Many might think their vote doesn't count, so government should express how it does and not make it a unpleasurable activity by making it mandatory. However much, there is truth in that point, an election simplifies down to one person over another other. My point still stands that unwanted force is never good and America should not accept that. It is human nature to show displeasure to forced activities that weren't done by will before hand. It isn't convenient for some citizens, and if registering for voting was much easier that there might be a higher voter turnout (Scholastic Magazine).If the government wants a higher turnout, than people shouldn't be making time for the government, the government should make more time for the people and not stripping us of our freedom.
There has been much debate about the legalisation of compulsory voting throughout political history and more importantly its place in a democratic society. Compulsory voting at a Commonwealth level was recognised in Australia in 1924 under section 245(1) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act as stated: “It shall be the duty of every elector to vote at each election” (Australian Electoral Commission, 2011). Since the introduction of compulsory voting there has been both strong advocacy and opposition in terms of its legitimacy in society, which this essay will highlight through the concept of its consistency with representative democracy and its ability to ensure parties reflect the will of all people. On the contrary, opponents argue that it increases the number of safe seat electorates as well as forcing the ill informed to vote.