Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why should voting be mandatory
Why should voting be mandatory
Why shouldn't we make voting mandatory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Why should voting be mandatory
It was in 1928 that universal suffrage had been granted in the United Kingdom. Prior to that time, people fought to have the right to vote so their opinions could be voiced, yet now we have that right, voting does not seem so significant. Before deciding whether voting should be compulsory or optional, understanding what exactly is meant by the term ‘compulsory voting’ is essential. It is also important to educate the general public more about politics so they can make an informed decision if and when they do choose to vote. Finally, there should be a comparison with other countries which currently enforce compulsory voting to better understand how it would work.
The term ‘compulsory voting’ is a misnomer as it is impossible to monitor whether everyone has voted or not, considering it is a secret ballot; it is merely the attendance that is compulsory. Lever (2008) believes that if voting were an obligation, then the right not to vote would be violated. However, as voting is confidential, the right not to vote is still maintained at the polling station (Lacroix, 2007; Engelen, 2009), where people may choose to cast a blank vote, so those who are not in favour of compulsory voting cannot argue that it is a breach of human rights. As Lacroix goes on to explain, compulsory voting does not go against article 9 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, or article 3 in the First Additional Protocol, further emphasising how this cannot be used as an argument by those against compulsory voting. To ensure that basic rights are not violated, ‘a blank option can and should be provided on the ballot...and an additional ‘none of the above’ option should be added’ (Engelen, 2009:219), which would allow the voter’s opinion...
... middle of paper ...
...=46 (Accessed 4 Nov 2009)
Engelen, B. (2009), ‘Why liberals can favour compulsory attendance’, Politics, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp 218-22
Faulks, K. (2001), ‘Should voting be compulsory?’, Politics Review, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp 24-25
Heywood, A. (2007), Politics, London: Palgrave MacMillan
IDEA (2002), Voter turnout since 1945: A global report. Available from: http://www.idea.int/publications/vt/upload/VT_screenopt_2002.pdf (Accessed 29 Nov 2009)
IDEA (2009), Compulsory Voting. Available from: http://www.idea.int/vt/compulsory_voting.cfm (Accessed 18 Nov 2009)
Kavanagh, D. (1983), Political Science and Political Behaviour, London: Allen and Unwin
Lacroix, J. (2007), ‘A liberal defence of compulsory voting’, Politics, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp 190-195
Lever, A. (2008), ‘“A liberal defence of compulsory voting”: Some reasons for scepticism’, Politics, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp 61-64
In document C, John W. Dean who was legal council the the U.S. President Richard M. Nixon said, “While compulsion of any kind is a restriction, so is the compulsion to drive only on the right side of the road. Requiring citizens to vote is no more restrictive than requiring them to register for the draft. And it is far less restrictive than requiring us, for example, to attend school; to serve on juries, possibly for weeks or months at a time; to pay taxes; or to serve in the military when drafted”(Dean). That shows the multitude of laws or requirements in America that are less important than voting, but are required. Voting is for the good of the country, yet people won't vote, but won't bat an eye when they are forced into jury duty.
Ornstein, Norman.2010. “Yes, Compulsory Voting Laws Would Unify American Politics.” Insights on Law & Society 1: 17-8.
There is an argument in the article “Telling Americans to Vote, or Else”, that is written by William A. Galston. The article states that voting should be necessary for everyone. The author contrasts American voting with Australian voting. In the text, it says,
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
Hasen, Richard. "Voter Suppression's New Pretext." the New York Times 16 November 2013: A- 19. Print.
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
Loewen, P. J., Milner, H., & Hicks, B. M. (1997). Does Compulsory Voting Lead To More Informed and Engaged Citizens? An Experimental Test. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 655-672. Retrieved from http://journals1.scholarsportal.info.proxy.bib.uottawa.ca/tmp/44514596344978336.pdf
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.
Tanguay, Brian . "Electoral Reform in Canada: Addressing the Democratic Deficit | Manitoba Law Journal." Robson Hall Faculty of Law. http://robsonhall.ca/mlj/content/electoral-reform-canada-addressing-democratic-deficit (accessed October 21, 2013).
Regardless of the political environment, it is the responsibility of voters to take initiative in becoming politically involved. However, the current electoral system in the United States is not one that fosters voter participation, but instead often discourages voting altogether. This is evidenced through the lackluster voter turnout in the United States, which is amongst the lowest of any democratic nation. While it is convenient to blame this lack of democratic participation on a lazy and apathetic public, the root of the problem lies elsewhere. The current system of winner-take-all elections, strategic gerrymandering, incumbency advantage and governmental unresponsiveness to constituent desires is enough to deter even the most politically consci...
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
In Document D, it tells us that although Italy has a compulsory voting system in place, it “ranks low” in political satisfaction among western countries. In addition, many voters have “unfavorable attitudes towards their electoral system”. When citizens are required to vote, their attitudes towards voting can become negative. In addition, in places like the US, where voting is optional, voters have the “highest voter satisfaction rates with their political institutions”. So, citizens are much happier with their government when they are given the choice to vote, not when they are forced to do it. The government doesn’t want their citizens to be unhappy; in the past, unhappy citizens has lead to revolts against the government. Citizens being unhappy about compulsory voting is shown in Document E. In Peru, citizens are required to vote and will receive a penalty of US$35 if they do not vote. Because of this penalty, 13% of ballots cast are blank or null. These citizens either “spoiled” their ballots or refused to vote for any of the candidates. It is clear that these citizens were unhappy about being forced to vote and they were unhappy about the penalty for not voting, so they voted, but they voted by casting ballots that were blank or null. Is it really better to have citizens that vote when they are submitting blank or null ballots? No. If citizens are so against voting that they will submit blank or null ballots, they should just be allowed to not
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
Katie, Beck. 2013. "Australia election: Why is voting compulsory?" BBC News, August 26. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-23810381 (March, 2015).
Governments should require compulsory voting because a higher percentage of citizens will educate themselves when they are required to vote. All campaigns will have to focus