compulsory voting

swatiraohnlu

Swati Rao
There are currently 32 countries with compulsory voting around the world. They include Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Uruguay, Singapore, Cyprus, Greece, and others. Of these 32 countries, 12 aggressively enforce their mandatory voting laws with penalties of varying kinds, including nominal penalties and small fees of as low as $15 and the deprivation of government services or the freezing of one's bank account. The debate surrounds whether mandatory voting enhances a democracy, improves voter participation, increases voter awareness on key political issues, and reduces arguably wasteful campaign spending on such things as voter turnout. But, opponents wonder whether compulsory voting violates the "right" to vote, and thus to not vote?
 
* Mandatory voting broadens representation and legitimacy. Such a system guarantees that the government represents a majority of the population, not only a minority of individuals who vote. This helps ensure that governments do not neglect sections of society that are less active politically, and victorious political leaders of compulsory systems may potentially claim greater political legitimacy than those of non-compulsory systems with lower voter turnout.

* Mandatory voting would reduce polarization. William Galston, senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution. "Mandatory voting would loosen partisan gridlock." US News and World Report. July 8th, 2010: "My prediction, based on the difference between voters and nonvoters in the United States today, is that it would reduce political polarization."
 
* Voting is not only a right, but a responsibility. The whole point of freedom is that everyone has a say and has a responsibility to voice their opinion, otherwise the system doesn't work. non-compulsory voting encourages entire classes of people to not bother with voting, since it is demanding, having to stand in long queues all day. People should exercise their right and responsibility to vote.

* 50% turnout not democracy; mandatory voting necessary. Keith Olbermann. "Make voting mandatory voting necessary." Salon. November 5, 2002: "two modest proposals to get head and hair flying. First: Mandatory voting. You heard me. A democracy where half of the citizens sit back and say, 'no, thanks,' isn't a democracy at all -- just a really large oligarchy. If we have not already reached it, we are nearing, inevitably, the point at which everyone who votes has a personal stake in the outcome. As the percentage of lever-pullers continues to decline, it's going to eventually be just the candidates' friends, families and people from their secret second lives who even bother to show up. You know -- like park league softball."
 
* Compulsory voting reduces power of lobbying groups. A benefit of compulsory voting is that it makes it more difficult for special interest groups to vote themselves into power. Under a non-compulsory voting system, if fewer people vote then it is easier for smaller sectional interests and lobby groups to control the outcome of the political process. The outcome of the election reflects less the will of the people (Who do I want to lead the country?) but instead reflects who was logistically more organized and more able to convince people to take time out of their day to cast a vote (Do I even want to vote today?).

* Compulsory voting decreases risk of political instability. High levels of participation decreases the risk of political instability created by crises or dangerous but charismatic leaders.
 
Mandatory voting compels voters to better educate themselves. Compulsory voting will potentially encourage voters to research the candidates' political positions more thoroughly. This may force candidates to be more open and transparent about their positions on many complex and controversial issues. Citizens will be willing to inform themselves even about unpopular policies and burning issues that need to be tackled (some even at the cost of social benefits). Better-informed voters will, therefore, oppose a plan that is unrealistic or would present an unnecessary budget-drain. This means that such a system could produce better political decisions that are not contradicting each other, quite upon the contrary.
 
* Voting is not a civic duty. A duty is a duty only when there is some tangible service involved. How can I, voting for what I myself want, be in any way performing a service for some else?

* Compulsory voting violates freedom of choice. A democracy is based on the principle of respecting basic human freedoms, such as free choice. This principle is directly violated by compulsory voting, as people do not have the right to choose not to express their view (should they have any).

* Compulsory voting may infringe on freedom to express one's relgion. For example, most Jehovah's Witnesses believe that they should not participate in political events. Forcing them to vote explicitly denies them their freedom of religious practice. In some countries with universal voting, Jehovah's Witnesses and others may be excused on these grounds. If however they are obliged to show up to vote, they can still use a blank or invalid vote
 
* Punishment for not voting could be modest but symbolic. A fine could be imposed of between $15 and $100. This is tolerable, and if somebody really doesn't want to vote, they could easily absorb such a fee. The point is that it is a recognizable punishment and a modest incentive to participate in an election. Many other very small nominal punishments could be considered as an alternative as well.

* Exemptions for when citizens can't vote/pay. Although voting in a country may be compulsory, penalties for failing to vote are not always strictly enforced. In Australia and Brazil, providing a legitimate reason for not voting (e.g. being sick or outside the country) is accepted. In Argentina, those who were ill on voting day, or over 500 kilometers away from their voting place are also excused, by requesting a doctor to prove their condition, in the first case; or asking for a certificate at a police station near where they are, in the second case. A homeless person could also presumably be exempted from paying a fee for not voting.
 
Compulsory voting helps protect voter access. In a similar way that the secret ballot is designed to prevent interference with the votes actually cast, compulsory voting prevents interference with access to the vote. Compelling voters to the polls for an election mitigates the impact that external factors may have on an individual's capacity to vote such as the weather, transport, or restrictive employers. It is a measure to prevent disenfranchisement of the socially disadvantaged. Polls are generally held on a Saturday or Sunday as evidenced in nations such as Australia, to ensure that working people can fulfill their duty to cast their vote. Similarly, mobile voting booths may also be taken to old age homes and hospitals to cater for immobilized citizens, and postal voting may be provided for people who are away from their electorate on election day.
 
* Mandatory voting has been succesful in Australia. Australia has had mandatory voting for decades without any problems and without serious protest or complaint. Voter participation has increased remarkably, along with the general awareness of the Australian citizenry. This demonstrates its viability in other countries.

* Mandatory voting exists in over 30 countries. There are currently 32 countries with compulsory voting. Of these, only 12 countries (and one Swiss canton) enforce it. Of the 30 member states of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 10 have forms of compulsory voting.
 
* Compulsory voting won't necessarily make sure the better and capable government comes into power. Look, just because people are forced to vote now, it doesn't change the fact that they refused to vote in the first place because none of the political parties/candidates contesting has swayed their interest. The very reason they don't vote for any of the contesting candidates is very simply that the citizen thinks (for obvious reasons) that none of the candidates have come up with a manifesto that will solve problems in status quo; none of them will make fine policy-makers because of the lack of leadership portrayed ; and that possibly, all the contesting candidates have had previous issues that deem that incapable of leading the country. The entire purpose of voting would be defeated because it's no longer a civic duty based on the people's choice, but will become just another meaningless electoral technicality in the establishment of a government.


* Vast majority of Americans oppose mandatory voting. An ABC News poll conducted in the summer of 2004 found that 72 percent of those surveyed oppose the idea. The results are nearly identical to a similar poll conducted by Gallup in the 1960s.
 
* Voting is not a civic duty. A duty is a duty only when there is some tangible service involved. How can I, voting for what I myself want, be in any way performing a service for some else?

* Compulsory voting violates freedom of choice. A democracy is based on the principle of respecting basic human freedoms, such as free choice. This principle is directly violated by compulsory voting, as people do not have the right to choose not to express their view (should they have any).

* Compulsory voting may infringe on freedom to express one's relgion. For example, most Jehovah's Witnesses believe that they should not participate in political events. Forcing them to vote explicitly denies them their freedom of religious practice. In some countries with universal voting, Jehovah's Witnesses and others may be excused on these grounds. If however they are obliged to show up to vote, they can still use a blank or invalid vote.
 
Compulsory voting in Australia was adopted in the state of Queensland in 1915 and subsequently adopted nationwide in 1924. With Australia's compulsory voting system comes additional flexibility for the voter - elections are held on Saturdays, absent voters can vote in any state polling place, and voters in remote areas can vote before an election (at pre-poll voting centers) or via mail.

Voter turnout of those registered to vote in Australia was as low as 47% prior to the 1924 compulsory voting law. In the decades since 1924, voter turnout has hovered around 94% to 96%.
 
Back
Top