Mandatory voting is a very popular topic, in Canada we see in recent elections almost half the population does not vote. Every citizen has the right to vote, being able to have a voice in their democracy, allowing the government to further benefit the needs of the common good but people still choose not to vote. Some people believe that if you choose not to vote during elections you shouldn't have the right to complain about the current government elected. I believe that mandatory voting is a good thing, allowing the government to fulfill the needs of everybody in a society, educating the majority of people with information about the democratic parties within canada. Forcing people to vote will raise conflict, illegitimate votes, increase in taxes to cover the cost to enforce the new laws as well as restricting people's freedoms. Mandatory voting may …show more content…
There are numerous amounts of positive and negative values and beliefs about mandatory voting in every society. The concept of forced voting does restrict people's freedoms but increased voter turnout allows for better election results, creating a system where everybody's opinions matter and taken into consideration. Politicians would be able to represent every citizen in society for the benefit of the common good. If it's mandatory to vote, people will spend more time researching politics and the orientations of the political candidates, strong participation of citizens is the foundation of a successful democracy. Canada may benefit from such a system being implemented, considering the voter turnout in the last five to eight years the information shows less and less are showing up too vote. For example countries like Australia and belgium have compulsory voting implemented, the data shows over ninety percent of the population participate in the election
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
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...
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
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.
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.
Adding restrictions of voting such as implementing fines will utterly change the prevalence of our nature in our country. In source #1 (“Telling Americans to Vote , or Else) by William A. Galston, mandatory voting is straightforwardly civic. A democracy can’t be strong if its citizenship is weak. And right now American citizenship is attenuated-strong on rights, weak on responsibilities. In 1924, Australia adopted mandatory voting and required costly fines if individuals didn’t participate to vote but why pay a fine that is equal to a traffic ticket than to not register a simple vote. As Abraham Lincoln states, “Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish
Canada is a society built on the promise of democracy; democracy being defined as “government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.” In order to operate at full potential, the people of Canada must voice their opinions and participate fully in the political system. This is why it’s shocking to see that people are becoming less engaged in politics and the voter turnout has steadily been declining over the last 20 years. This lack of participation by Canadians is creating a government that is influenced by fewer people, which is detrimental to the democratic system Canada is built on.
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
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.
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.
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
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
The young as well as the older people of Canada seem to be in a deadlock. The question of if the federal government should or should not lower the voting age is a question debated surely around the dinner tables of families in Canada, as well as in the ranks of the government. Some people even suggest that the age needs to be raised. What would make people want the voting age to be lowered to an even lower age than the young adult age of 18? On the other hand how can the youth of Canada who have their own individual views be able to make a difference without being able to vote? Both sides provide for an intriguing look into the facts and resolutions for an appropriate way to either change the voting age or keep it the same. Throughout this paper I will look at and analyze the arguments of the youth who claim to be 'disenfranchised', as well as others who see the lowering of the voting age to be detrimental rather than an improvement to the Government of Canada's political process. In 1854, before Canada became a responsible government the only people allowed to vote were people who had a high value of land which they owned, and had a high income. Women and people with other ethnic backgrounds and religious beliefs were also denied the right to vote. This did not mean that these people did not have their views and beliefs on who and what they wanted in their government but rather they were denied the right. These laws have changed since then drastically and Canada has become a democratic country (rule by the people). However, the frustration of not being able to vote and support their ideals and politicians does live on in the hearts and minds of thousands of young Canadians under the age of eighteen. The...
Voting is an integral part of electing leaders in government, without it, the subjects of the government would, in all likelihood, cause public unrest. It is for the reason of preventing said unrest that an effective voting system be put in place in a given government to prioritize the needs of the people. A preferential voting system would be an effective way to elect leaders in Canada due to the fact that it creates a majority government, promotes a strong two-party system, and creates a large pool of votes. A majority government would be able to be elected from the use of a preferential ballot and would not allow for a minority government and thus would allow for a better controlled government with little conflict when a new bill is put forth.
Voting is very much in the mind of the individual. Many United States citizens feel as though they have a civic duty to vote, that the democratic process doesn 't work unless people are actively participating in it- Others believe that their vote isn 't going to make a difference. Citizens who need the most help from the government and could get the most help, are often unable to have their voices heard. Vote suppression decreases the number of eligible voters and minimizes the electoral power of individuals. With the rise of social media, there are more young people involved in politics now more than ever, but a large number of the younger generation still do not vote. There are several reasons that one might