What do you DUers think about mandatory voting?

[Nutmegger]

I'm kind of for it although I find myself teetering between "for" and "against". What are your thoughts? Maybe if most people were "forced" to participate, they would take it upon themselves to get educated about a particular candidate? It seems to work for Australia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting

[proud patriot]

1. as long as "None of the Above" is a choice I'm for it

:hi:

[TahitiNut]

48. GMTA. Exactly what I was going to say.

To the word. :hi: :hug: :loveya: (Women who agree with me are VERY attractive!) :silly:

[Skip Intro]

2. Should there be a vote for it?

[wuushew]

3. Stupid idea

especially in our winner take all system. If all alternatives are pro-war or pro-corporate why lend the winning party a false mandate of popular support.

[mattclearing]

41. Agreed. n/t

[bbinacan]

4. Against it,

One should educate themselves about who to vote for. Mandatory voting will only get voters that saw the latest ad. Bad idea.

[FreedomAngel82]

14. And some people might not want to vote

I think it's unfair. Especially in what's supposed to be a democracy. Last election cycle an uncle of mine said he wasn't voting for either canidate (at least he didn't like Bush obviously!) and he shouldn't have to.

[bbinacan]

19. Very good point.

[BOHICA06]

5. Limit your freedom ....

to select your freedom? Hmmmmmmmm

Not a good principal, I wouldn't support such a push. It seems counter to outlook of the Constitutional writers.

[sojourner]

6. it also takes away a citizen's prerogative to abstain from

voting --- whether there are no candidates he/she can support or his/her religious beliefs preclude participation in elections.

[skids]

7. Hrm, well, let's put it this way.

If a person who doesn't want to vote is forced to by a politician, who do you think they are going to vote against?

[MADem]

8. Is it New Zealand where you do not have to vote, but you pay if you

don't? Something like thirty six bucks???

It would sure be a way to raise revenue!

[Mabus]

9. We've got enough stupid people voting

However I would like to propose a law that only people who are registered to vote can buy flags.

[BuyingThyme]

10. It worked for Saddam Hussein;

it'll work for Bush.

[Nicole]

11. I'm against it

People not interested can turn in a blank ballot anyway so what's the point?.

[niyad]

12. "if god had meant us to vote, she would have given us candidates"

[Spiffarino]

13. Excellent idea. We should start immediately.

If you are against voting (i.e., Jehovah's Witness or any other religious or conscientious objector) you can mail in a card that says, "Decline to vote."

From what I understand about the Australian compulsory voting laws, they do just that. Anybody who fails to send some type of response receives a small fine. It may seem harsh to some, but it is no doubt effective and is hardly an imposition.

I would go a step further and make Election Day a mandatory national holiday. Increasing voter participation means more people will have a stake in the electoral process. Since they're voting any way, more folks are likely to pay at least a little bit of attention to the issues.

And to all who say, "It would just mean more stupid people would vote," I give a hearty :thumbsdown::grr:. That's what you'd hear from Republicans. As a hardcore Dem, I don't think there should be any test other than U.S. citizenship. The mentally retarded need to vote. So do the illiterate, the poor, prisoners, the homeless, etc. And I don't give a rat's if they drop a blank ballot. It's not just about choosing a candidate, it's about standing up and being counted as a citizen.

[FreedomAngel82]

16. Only thing I agree with

is that election day should be a holiday. You should also make the results come out at least two/three days later to make sure. It isn't something you can just rush through. People deserve to be able to get out and vote. Not everybody can get there early or in time before the polls close.

[Spiffarino]

18. So where do you disagree?

Not trying to start a flame or anything. I'm genuinely curious.

I used to object to voting on religious grounds when I was a kid, but as I approached voting age my views - and my religion - changed. For a very long time I was opposed to "compulsory" voting until I learned how they do it in Australia. Now I'm a firm believer because they don't impose voting on people who legitimately object to the act of voting, only to those who are too lazy to write a couple of words on a piece of paper and send it back postage paid.

[FreedomAngel82]

24. I don't like forced voting

I don't like saying people have to go out and vote or be punished. It's wrong pure and simple in a democracy.

[Spiffarino]

56. Yours is the best argument I've heard

Not that I agree with it, but you stand on a good principle and I admire it.

Having said that, I am horrified by others arguing that so-called "uninformed" people shouldn't vote. Did we fight a Civil War over nothing? The slaves couldn't read or write and most probably had no idea who was running for office. Does this justify their disenfranchisement? Abominable.

[northzax]

20. I like the Oregon model, myself

make everything vote by mail, straight up absentee ballots for everyone. It has spiked participation everywhere it has been tried, and there is the advantage that everything is paper.

[tenshi816]

31. My best friend's mother here in the UK

always votes, but often what she does is write "no one fit to govern" on her ballot. She (and I) feel the same way you do, that it's "not just about choosing a candidate, it's about standing up and being counted as a citizen."

[Mabus]

53. This is where I have to disagree with you

Unless a person casts an informed vote I have a hard time feeling like it was worth their time. You say that the mentally retarded need to vote but if they are severely handicapped are they really voting? Or are they just puppets for their caretakers? To me, this wouldn't be a "valid" vote.

How can a truly illerate person really know who they are voting for? Are you sure they would know how to vote? I'm also a hardcore Dem and I want to know why this person is illiterate. If he's an American, we, as fellow Americans, have failed him and ourselves because although he may have the requisite intent to vote for candidate "A" and his ballot may end up not even being counted because he is too illiterate to vote correctly. Informed voters are the crux of the matter for me. When people make informed decisions (derived from hearing the various sides of the issues and having some comprehension of the consequences of that decision) I believe they make better decisions. What is the media like in Australia? Do they have something our dead Fairness Doctrine?

A huge difference between America and Australia is the form of government. They have a parlimentary system, so when they vote for representational government they actually get one. From my perspective, in Australia, a voter has a better chance of having someone in the government that shares their viewpoint than we do with our two party system.

[noamnety]

15. completely against

And here's my logical argument (aside from the obvious one, that as long as we have 9 hour waits in some places to vote, it's a nonstarter anyway):

1. Some people can't get to the polls because their car died, child care arrangements fell through, they fall ill, etc.
2. Some people aren't informed enough to make a valid decision.
3. People are able to submit a blank ballot if they have no preference or are uninformed.


Given a scenario where a single mom has sick kids to take care of, her car broke down, there's no public transportation, and she hasn't even had a chance to read up on the candidates, how can you justify fining her and giving her community service for refusing to walk for miles, carrying her sick kids (possibly in the rain), to cast a blank ballot? That's insane.

[Spiffarino]

17. You seem to assume the law would be Draconian

If a person is sick or just can't get to the polling place, let them fill out a card that says, "Gee, I couldn't get there." Hell, have a series of check boxes full of excuses. Who cares. The point is to get people involved in the electoral process and make them aware of their civic responsibility.

And again, so what if they cast a blank ballot? Perhaps there isn't anybody they want to vote for. I've done it before when there wasn't anything or anyone I cared about on the ballot. I showed up to vote "feh!" on Election Day, and it felt good.

[noamnety]

25. If the law's not going to be enforced, why have it?

If you can do a "I couldn't get there" card, what's to stop anyone from filling it out? Who's to check if you're lying?

The entire law is unenforceable, unless it is Draconian.

[Spiffarino]

55. I reiterate...so what?

The entire point of mandatory voting is to get people off their butts and out to the polls in greater numbers. If it's a pain in the ass not to vote - even if it's just a little pin-prick - people will be far more inclined to do it when they have to think more about it.

How about seat belt laws? The fines aren't that harsh where I live; only $50. Yet people buckle up at a rate of over 90%. If voting or just sending in a sheet that says "No thanks" is the path of least resistance, people will take it.

[marions ghost]

33. Right...mandatory voting gets people involved...

but since so many Americans perceive mandatory voting as some kind of infringement of rights, we wouldn't stand a chance of introducing this over here. So many of our rights are in jeopardy that nobody can trust the government to conduct voting responsibly, much less mandatory voting. Our election system is so corrupt that you'd have to clean that up before you could get any support for greater participation.

I lived in Australia as a young adult. It was so great to see other young adults voting (a rarity here). Voting starts at the age when one begins to pay taxes, and is considered a civic responsibility. (Not like here where people often wake up at 40 or so thinking OMG I'd better vote). There's no problem about 'none of the above' (why do people automatically think that Australians would FORCE their citizens to choose?) The fine for not voting is very small but even so, most people comply. One of the obvious benefits is that there's no need to keep registering and re-registering--giving those who would steal elections lots of opportunities for disenfranchisement. In Australia, nobody can simply take away your right to vote. Election monkey business is virtually nil as corruption is difficult. Voting software is open for inspection to the public. THINK about that.

But I understand how in our paranoid society mandatoty voting wouldn't be accepted. Australians (despite the current Bush-loving PM) still believe that their government works for them.

[Hippo_Tron]

21. Against it...

Plus how would it be enforced, especially with homeless people?

[tkmorris]

22. Against it

I think whenever you propose a law to force people to do anything you need to present an extremely compelling argument. I believe in personal freedoms, very strongly, and such a thing as this removes a little bit of that.

The arguments for doing this are reasonable, but not nearly convincing enough for such a drastic measure.

[K-W]

23. It would complete the farce of American democracy I supppose

Mandatory voting is the answer to the question:

'How does an authoritarian country hide the public's disintrest in and distrust of its currupt and ineffectual electoral institutions?'

[AgadorSparticus]

26. that's about right, too.

[expatriot]

27. Against it but for other "radical" measures to increase voter turnout.

here are just a few i thought of....

-Automatic voter registration/re-registration with
driver's license renewal, income tax filing, school registration of children, etc.

- National same-day registration

-Election Day a national holiday. Tax breaks for employers who give employees day off w/ pay, smaller tax breaks for employers who give employees 2 hours paid to go vote.

-Express voting (like express lanes) for those with children, elderly or disabled. Also have daycare available at polling station. Also offer childcare and have an EMT on duty at all time at the polling station .


- Set a minimum number of voting machines per 1,000 registered voters.

-Polling places open 24 hours 12AM-12PM on Election Day.

[KharmaTrain]

28. How About Elections On Saturdays?

Why Tuesday? I've never gotten a real good answer on why elections have to be held on Tuesday...a day that is the most "business day" of the week. With voting being a "chore" for so many...or one they "can't afford"...then make it at a time when there's no or little work going on like a Saturday or Sunday.

The other option would be to make election day a national holiday where only mandatory emergency personnel must report for work...and then after they have the opportunity to vote. Make it a holiday that mandates employers must pay employees overtime, like Christmas...or make it a paid holiday.

There will always be people who won't want to vote and for whatever reasons, those rights should be honored. While it shouldn't be a criminal sin not to vote, it should be a moral one.

And honestly...there are gonna be a lot of very disenchanted Repugnicans next fall. They're not going to vote for a Democrat, but they can't stomache pulling the lever for their local crook...so they'll stay home. That's not such a bad thing.

[expatriot]

29. A lot of people leave town for the weekend...

That is why I believe that Election Day should be a national holiday but still on a Tuesday, not moved to a Monday so as to prevent people's natural temptation to split town for the three day weekend.

[Floogeldy]

30. Unenforceable

Unconstitutional.

[bowens43]

32. Horrible idea.

Toss freedom out the window? Everyone has the RIGHT not to participate.

[blindpig]

34. Yes, with none of the above as an option.

Don't know how you'd enforce it, bound to raise some hackles.

[mopaul]

35. i support it, plus a whole month to vote

the current system is useless, only a tiny percentage of citizens control all our lives.

[Selatius]

36. It is not voting that is the problem. Problem is the two-party duopoly

You've got two parties representing several views that could encompass several parties in multi-party representative government in other nations. This isn't working. Nevermind the fact that special interest money is ruled "free speech" by the SCOTUS or the fact that we don't elect the president by popular vote.

[DiverDave]

37. No, but make election day a holiday.

eom

[Cleita]

38. No. I don't like it.

I think we need to simplify voting though. The confusion caused by candidates and issues is often why people, who aren't politically savvy like us, stay away from the polls.

I think the material they send out with the sample ballots should explain in plain words what the candidates stand for and what the issues are about. The way they are now, they are too wordy and confusing for a busy person to read.

They should give them a brief idea of each candidate and issue from a liberal and a conservative. Once the voter has some idea of what it's about then he can take it from there and ask more questions if he likes.

[troubleinwinter]

39. Absolutely not.

We have trouble enough getting access to polls for people who CARE about their vote.

It should be for people who want to vote. It should be an exercise of rights.

Why would we want to COMPELL people to do something they don't want to, ansd may be unable to do in an informed and responsible way? Yay....more laws to force citizens into falling into line (NOT). We should have the FREEDOM to vote or not, as we choose.

[Dongfang Hong]

40. Terrible idea. n/t

[ultraist]

42. Bad idea

For the reasons others have stated. It's wrong to punish those who cannot get to the polls or who have recently moved and did not recieve their "card" or who do not have an address (homeless, transients).

The focus should be on eliminating voting barriers, not punishing citizens who don't vote. Others posted several feasible ways in which to do this, with a National Voting day being on the top of my list. Easier registration methods, with the ability to register the day of the election, and free public transportation to the polls are a few more things we could implement.

[foreverdem]

43. Against it

Forcing people to vote when you are supposed to be living in a democracy I don't think is right. People have the right to abstain, for whatever reason.

I do agree, like others on this thread, that election day should be made a national holiday, to make it easier for those who do want to vote.

[SmokingJacket]

44. No.

If people don't care, they shouldn't be forced to make a random vote. People will end up voting based on name recognition, who's better looking, etc., even moreso than now.

I *do* think it should be made much easier to vote -- voting day should be a national holiday, free rides to voting stations -- and there should be much easier ways to find out information about candidates.

[Orangepeel]

45. Firmly against it. If people don't want to participate..

they shouldn't be forced to. I think those people are stupid and irresponsible but that's their choice.

[Nutmegger]

46. Thanks for all your replies

Interesting responses, thank you.

[robcon]

47. Mandatory voting is the stupidest idea I've heard for a while....

... and that includes invading Iraq.

[sweetheart]

49. For it.

It is the only responsibility in a democracy, but combined with
mandatory voting needs to be an end to the 2 party pretense... for
a coalition system. Then the truth will set us free!

[Chemical Bill]

50. Why bother, Diebold already votes for us. n/t

[KoKo]

51. Yes...folks should definitely be forced to vote. So many people take

voting for grated and go "ho...hum." Force it on them. That way maybe we could get some good Dems in office.

[Eureka]

52. The Australian case....

Just if anyone is wondering.......

The Australian electoral model differs from the US one which maybe makes our "mandatory voting" not as clear cut as it might seem.

For a start, it's not the voting that's compulsory, it's the registration and turning up on the day.

It is mandatory to be on an electoral role if you are eligible to vote, but they only really check if those enrolled didn't vote. Also, they don't really check for those who aren't enrolled (although they do send door knockers around to register voters prior to major elections, just to make it easy for everyone to enrol properly)

It is also mandatory to attend a voting centre and have your name checked off the list on voting day.

But, it is not, per se, mandatory to vote, only to have your name crossed off the list. Once you have your ballots, you can do whatever you like with them, so long as they end up in the little box by the door on your way out. Draw, scribble, pick a candidate, it's all up to the individual because it's a secret ballot, there is no way for them to check if you actually 'voted'. If you don't fill in the ballot correctly the vote is informal (a "Donkey Vote")

And one last thing, we always vote on a Saturday (it's something about letting the working stiffs take part in democracy without loosing part of their pay :-) )

BUT, the biggest difference between our systems, IMHO, is the Australian Electoral Commission. This is a Federal agency that is responsible for all voting on State/Local/Federal elections (and if, for example, you ran a big club and wanted to take a vote, you could get the AEC to run it on your behalf to ensure it's all above board). The system works the same way everywhere in the country. I think this would make a huge difference in the US, where states seem to run things themselves, which leads to Florida and Ohio. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think there might be a case for having a unified system of voting across the entire US.

Oh, and we use paper and pencil, quite a reliable system.

[Nutmegger]

54. Wow - thanks for the info Eureka

I was looking for more info on Australia. Two thumbs up!:thumbsup::thumbsup: