Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Compulsory voting in america
Compulsory voting in america
Compulsory voting in america
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Idea of Compulsory Voting
After Australia, Singapore, and Switzerland implemented compulsory voting and the turnout of voters grew, other democratic countries began wondering if the idea should be implemented globally. Research began on how this implementation affected countries with compulsory voting in place and how it would affect other countries such as Canada (Twomey, 2013). The idea that Canada, or another similarly democratic country, should pass a policy of compulsory voting would be against the very foundation of freedom that defines a democratic state. It brings to mind three questions with it, is voting a right or duty, does it change the level of intelligent political participation, and does the compulsion goes against all that is democracy?
Voting: Right or Duty?
The question of whether voting should be a right or duty is a question that is integral to answering whether voting should be mandatory. To make voting mandatory would take away the freely elected portion of freely elected representatives (Barry, 2013). Although to be fair it is the attendance that is mandatory and it is admissible to submit a blank or spoiled ballot (Barry, 2013). However in court cases judges came to the agreement that not voting is a “violation of the Electoral Act” but few have actually been charged for the submission of a blank or spoiled ballot (Barry, 2013). Still the problem remain of that this is taking the ability to freely elect the representative of the majority population choice.
Unlike laws making education mandatory up to a certain age making voting mandatory is taking away the decision to make the decision of not voting as a way of protest, the protest being that none of the representatives are worth voting for, as it is...
... middle of paper ...
... A Quarterly Review of Politics and Public Affairs , 65 (1).
Delwit, P. (2013). The End of Voters in Europe? Electoral Turnout since WWII. Open Journal of Political Science , 3 (1), 44-52.
Fowler, A. (2013). Electoral and Policy Consequences of Voter Turnout: Evidence from Compulsory Voting in Australia. Quarterly Journal of Political Science , 8 (2), 159- 182.
Gagne, R. H. (2005). Voting on the Vote: Electoral Reform An Examination. Tomslake: D- Zyne Logo Publishing.
Hill, L. (2013). Public Acceptance of Compulsory Voting: Explaining the Australian Case. Representation , 46 (4), 425-438.
Jenson, C. B., & Spoon, J.-J. (2011). Compelled without direction: Compulsory voting and party spreading. Electoral Studies , 30, 700-711.
Twomey, A. (2013). Deliberate Democracy, Compulsory Voting and The Will of the People. Social Science Research Network , 13 (32).
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.
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...
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
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
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.
The right to vote for non-citizens has become an increasingly controversial topic due to the strong and often divisive opinions of permanent Canadian residents. The capacity to vote is one of the most important and valued freedoms granted to individuals. Although the acceptance of non-citizen resident voting is frequently encouraged in order to propel self-governing justice and immigrant inclusion, opponents claim that it is in a nation’s best interest to delay voting rights to non-citizens. According to this claim, by preserving voting rights to citizens, non-citizens would have the social responsibility to actively learn the essential community services and self-ruled obligations necessary to earn their citizenship. In spite of this claim, non-citizens should be allowed to vote because the right to vote offers immigrants a more welcomed chance to contribute in the decision-making processes that take place in Canadian legislature. Seeing that this legislature administrates the rights and freedoms of the immigrant populations, it would only be just if immigrants had the right to elect candidates who spoke on behalf of their best interests.
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.
The deficiency of the Canadian electoral system decreases the level of democracy in the Canadian constitution. Canadian citizens are known for being active in political matters; whether it relates to them specifically or not. In fact, “on average, educated, well informed, and interested in politics – all factors associated with high voter turnout.” But if this is the case, why is there a democratic deficit in the Canadian electoral system? The answer is simple: Most elections today rely heavily on media when it comes to national context; which decreases the l...
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
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.
From its early period, the United States has obtained an indirect type of democracy, and has always had contentment that its citizens are allowed to vote for their representatives, especially the President. Nevertheless, the amount of citizens that actually vote in nationwide elections has decreased noticeably over the years. Voter participation and turnout has been declining in the United States throughout history. Voter turnout, the percentage of eligible individuals who actually vote (Ginsberg), to this day is lower than it was in the 1900’s. Since 1912, presidential elections have only had about 50 to 65 percent of Americans participate. This means that about half of United States citizens who are eligible and have the freedom to vote have failed to participate in presidential elections. At the end of the nineteenth century voter turnout started plummeting, reaching the 60 percent level by the election of 1912 (Teixeira, 1987). The declining rate of voter participation in the United States is due to voter registration and procedu...
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
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.
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.