Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
+ negative mandatory voting essay
Essays mandatory voting debate
+ negative mandatory voting essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The United States of America has been practicing a democratic government since the Declaration of Independence was written in 1776. Since then American citizens have been given many rights and responsibilities. These rights and responsibilities include voting, serving in the military, jury duty, paying taxes, and many others. Jury duty and paying taxes are mandatory and are responsibilities of all citizens. However, serving in the military is only mandatory when there is a draft. Since jury duty, paying taxes, and serving in the military, during a draft, are mandatory, the belief is voting should be too. Some even call it a citizen’s civic responsibility (Compulsory voting, 2015).
The opposing view states that voting should not be compulsory
…show more content…
This has been the practice since the Declaration of Independence was written but only a certain, low percentage of the public has recently helped to pick the candidates and the passing of important proposed laws. Americans have not been following through on the ideas on how the country was founded. They have been given all these freedoms, but they have not followed through and left the democracy to struggle. That is why mandatory voting laws should be adopted. It would help the country to get back on the track that the forefathers set up for all citizens. All citizens would be a part of the decision making of the country and would be following through on their civic responsibility of being a citizen. If the forefathers would see the way that Americans having been abusing their freedoms, they would surely be disgusted. They might even want to consider an alternative way to pick candidates because the current way has not been used in the way that it was …show more content…
Voting has educational affects that no one ever often considers. Voters would become familiar with the political topics and the issues that are present in the country. A well informed public would raise the level of conversations to a higher intellect (Compulsory voting, 2015). In addition, compulsory voting would save the country financially since there would no longer be a need for advertisements to encourage voting. Also, the country might gain money from the fine that non-voters would pay, if paying a fine is the chosen punishment. The financial benefits will positively affect the government which in turn will make a positive impact on individual
All in all, compulsory voting can seriously help out the United States of America. Although, forcing people to vote will make a lot more ignorant people vote for no reason, it will help get rid of those people by making them more intelligent in the world of politics, it will help rid fraudulent votes, and will help people realize that there are many more required things that are less important than voting. Compulsory voting will
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
The Electoral College system should be scrapped and be replaced with popular vote because it is unfair. By abolishing the Electoral College and replacing it with popular vote, it would represent citizens equally, it would allow citizens to elect their president just as they elect their governors and senators, and it would motivate and encourage citizens to participate in voting.
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.
In the United States we are all guaranteed one vote per person. Everyone has an equal voice in electing the people that serve in the government. Every four years during the month of November citizens of America go to the polls to vote for a president and vice-president of the United States. Am I right? Not really. They actually vote for electors that then vote for our president. It makes me wonder, "Are we a democracy?" Having the Electoral College defeats its purpose. I oppose the electoral college for these three reasons, in election 2000 the president that lost the popular vote actually won, everyone's vote doesn't really count, plus the electoral college has disrupted elections fifteen times!
In 2012, only 58% of the population voted in the primary elections. That is a very low number compared to all the other countries. According to William A. Galston’s article, “Telling Americans to Vote, or Else,” he states, “Jury duty is mandatory; why not voting.” I agree with his statement. Pursuant to the online business dictionary, jury duty is “one of the highest duties of citizenship.” In jury duty, you are making a very important decision. You’re making the decision to prove if someone is innocent or guilty. The idea of jury duty correlates with the aspect of voting. You’re a part of the decision process to pick the next leader of our country. As well as jury duty, voting should be added to one of the highest duties of U.S
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
Over the recent year’s American voters have brought back a way of voting that was used during the country’s old age of existence, this rediscovered act is known as early voting. Early voting started in the early 1990s, though the outcome has not had such a high consistency over the years it is still recommended to help the Election Day process in the country. Since voter turnout is not entirely consistent due to the process being constantly shortened by state laws, the argument against early voting is that it is a waste of taxpayers’ money, opponents believe it is ineffective. Although that is not the case, in his 2016 blog article, “A Brief History of Early Voting,” Michael McDonald inform readers on the brief history of early voting as he states how the rates of voters who has cast their ballots before election day has increased over the years, “from less than a tenth to about a third” (qtd. in McDonald) since the 1990s. This proves to show why the money being spent on this act is not simply being wasted. Although early voting has
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.
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.
Everyone has the right to vote, or not to vote in the years we live today. People decide whether they wish to participate in the nation’s future or just walk aimlessly and allow it to take its own path. Over decades, centuries, our country continued growing but just recently did it allow all to vote as long as they call this nation home. Run-on Sentence: Over decades, centuries, our country continued growing, but just recently did it allow all to vote as long as they call this nation home. However, large amounts of people still do not vote in any politics. Today everyone should understand what differences a vote could make like what can happen, why it matters, and benefits of voting.
It 's important for us all to vote. I know that we all have different opinions, beliefs, and lives from one another. This speech is