OT: Mandatory Voting

[Raging Deadstar]

Lol, there's always a way round things...

[geoschmo]

The problem is now you can't tell if someone is refusing to participate, or just doesn't give a flip. Low voter turnout can be interepreted in any way you want. If you're the incumbant you can say things are going great and it's a measure of the voters satisfaction with with how things are going. If you are a challanger you could say that things are so bad that the the voters are disilusioned with the whole process and don't think it matters. We can't really tell though.

If people are compelled to take some sort of action, even if it's only to turn in a blank ballot, at least then we have a better sense of what they are feeling.

[ June 28, 2004, 19:36: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

[Fyron]

Maybe. But forcing them to go to the polls is not the solution.

[Will]

I'm pretty sure that most (if not all) countries with mandatory voting also make Voting Day a major holiday-type event. In the US, a lot of people have to rush to go vote during their lunch hour, since laws requiring employers to allow their workers time to vote are a hassle to get enforced. But in the mandatory-voting countries, many people will get the day off, or at least a half day off, in order to cast their vote.

As long as voting in the US is seen as a burden instead of a vital right and duty, mandatory voting probably isn't the best idea. And if it is implemented, there should be an abstain/no-vote option for each item on the ballot, and voters should get brief (1 paragraph) summaries of each candidate's platform, ballot proposition/initiative, etc. Because a lot of Americans would just vote for a random politician without having any idea what that politician's views are.

[Slick]

I always vote because I know how valuable this right is compared to the situation in some other countries. People have died for my right to vote and I respect that very much.

I think it would be interesting to take the reverse approach. What if the country said that [______] people no longer will be allowed to vote because of repeated low voter turnout and that the small number who do vote don't make a difference in the final numbers anyway. Fill in the blank with any group you wish. Can you imagine the firestorm that would follow? The very people in the blank above would be outraged and the rest of the country would certainly side with them about being discriminated against. There is no doubt that this would be the reaction. You'd think that if voting was so important to them, the would vote in the first place. Some people just want the right to vote, but don't want to exercise that right.

Slick.

[Abdiel]

And they would be right. (sorry bout the pun =)

If they couldn't care less, or loved the incumbent so much, or for whatever else reason they didn't want to turn up to the polls, it's their fundamental right. Any government that turns around to try to change this is asking for trouble from all sides.

Forcing at least a blank form is well, ambiguous. Is the government now starting to flex its muscles, and how far would it go? The next step of filling those blank forms for you might not be too far off. But pretending you were there and filling it in for you totally is another different matter, which is why people may choose not to turn up.

Then again, we are habitual animals. Those people in countries with mandatory show-up-or-____ systems are probably used to it, that, or it might be the next change in the pipeline.

But still, don't take away that right not to show up, not to care, not to bother about what somebody else thinks I think.

Abd.

[Gandalf Parker]

Its not the voting thats a problem. Most of the united states actually does vote. They voted for their favorite singer, or who should leave the house, or their favorite episode. All those important TV things. They just didnt vote for president.