IndexArguments for Compulsory VotingArguments against Compulsory VotingConsequences of Compulsory VotingExperience in AustraliaCompulsory Voting: Considerations for CanadaWorks CitedVoting is one of the most essential principles of democratic government. Participation in elections is, without a doubt, the most important citizenship right in democratic nations. Despite its importance, countries around the world are experiencing declining voter turnout. In Canada, voter turnout in federal general elections has declined since 1993, and voting rates are likely to continue to decline. There are numerous theories to explain why people don't vote. Apathy, cynicism and negative attitudes towards politicians and the electoral process join socio-demographic factors such as youth, low education and low income as explanations for a person's decision not to vote. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Numerous ideas have been generated to increase voter turnout. Some believe that smaller measures, such as widespread advertising campaigns and scheduling elections on weekends rather than weekdays, could increase voter turnout. Others suggest using technology as a way to help citizens fulfill their voting responsibilities. In contrast to these smaller measures, countries such as Australia and Belgium have combated the problem of low voter turnout by implementing laws that force citizens to vote. Countries that have compulsory voting generally have much higher turnout than countries without compulsory voting laws, although critics are quick to note that some countries without compulsory voting laws, such as New Zealand, also have distinct levels of voter turnout. This document discusses compulsory voting. Examines the arguments for and against compulsory voting and considers the experience of countries that have implemented compulsory voting, focusing on Australia. Arguments in favor of compulsory voting For some, the justification for compulsory voting is simple. Like paying taxes, voting is a civic responsibility. Only full participation can guarantee the legitimacy of the chosen government. Political scientist Arend Lijphart even goes so far as to state: A political system with the universal right to vote but with only a small fraction of citizens exercising this right should be considered a democracy simply in the very formalistic and empty sense of the term. And, in practice, a government elected in such a formalist democratic way cannot have much democratic legitimacy. For most supporters of compulsory voting, the overwhelming argument in favor of compulsory voting laws is high and relatively equal voter turnout. Supporters argue that decisions made by democratically elected governments are more legitimate when a larger number of the population participated in that government's elections. There are other important arguments in favor of compulsory voting. Some believe that increased voter participation can spur greater participation and interest in other political activities. Furthermore, it forces citizens to be educated and creates at least a minimum level of political interest. Compulsory voting is also believed to reduce the role of money in politics. The logic is that when everyone is forced to vote, there is no need for political parties to spend campaign funds to convince people to vote. Attention could then shift from a concentration on “getting out the vote” to the issues and choices aheadto the voter. Implementing compulsory voting is also believed to discourage attack publicity. This type of exposure works “primarily by selectively depressing turnout among those who are not likely to vote for the attacker. When almost everyone votes, attack tactics lose much of their appeal.” Eliminating attack ads could help eliminate some of the mistrust and cynicism they cause. Mandatory Voting is also believed to have another important benefit for both society and individuals. Helps protect oneself from marginalization. Since the probability of voting increases with age, education and income, it is suggested that “actual voters do not form a representative sample but a biased sample of all eligible voters, biased in favor of privileged members of society” . In Australia, political scientist Lisa Hill also notes that compulsory voting can ensure equal political opportunities. Its justification is that, in Australia, every effort is made to ensure that all obstacles normally faced by those who have chosen not to vote are eliminated. As a result, voting is made much easier for everyone and equal opportunities are available to everyone. He explains: “because of the secret ballot, election officials cannot force people to mark their ballot. Therefore the vote itself does not appear to be obligatory; instead, it is registration and presence at the polling station that are truly mandatory. In this way we actively seek the opportunity to participate rather than the participation itself.” Arguments against compulsory voting The main argument against compulsory voting is that it is inconsistent with the freedom associated with democracy because it violates the right of the citizen. individual not to vote. Opponents of coercion agree that voting is a valuable right and a significant democratic principle, but “to speak meaningfully about the right to vote, one must also allow for the right to abstain from voting.” While voting may be required, you cannot force someone to have preferences or opinions. Therefore, claims of legitimacy based on a large number of votes can be rejected because the votes were, in some sense, forced. Furthermore, others wonder how the participation of the "ignorant and disinterested" can improve electoral results. Other arguments hold that political life in general suffers if citizens are required to vote. It is argued that political parties and parliamentarians in Australia are becoming lazy. The party organization becomes less responsive and, as a result, disaffection among party members grows. Critics suggest that compulsory voting in Australia has succeeded in getting people to the polls, but has not resolved the feelings of alienation people feel towards political parties. The costs of maintaining a compulsory voting system are also listed as an argument against maintaining a compulsory voting system. compulsory voting system. The cost of mobilizing the Australian vote and enforcing electoral law in federal elections is controversial, but one report estimates the average cost to be around $5 (Australian) per vote. However, it should be noted that the supporting evidence is “both incomplete and largely anecdotal.” Consequences of compulsory voting The most significant consequence of compulsory voting is the increase in the percentage of invalid votes. Australia has one of the highest levels of invalid votes among established liberal democracies. Spoiled ballots are also a problem in Belgium: in the 1995 elections, almost 16% of the electorate chose not to vote or toruin your ballot. Invalid ballots can, however, serve a useful function. In a compulsory voting system, casting an invalid ballot can become an additional voting option – a vote for none of the above. While a nonvoter may be dismissed as complacent or apathetic, a flawed ballot in a compulsory system could “serve as an indicator that the concerns of a growing segment of the public are not being heard by politicians.” In addition to a large number of invalid votes, there may also be a larger number of random or “donkey” votes. That is, voters selecting a candidate at random (often the first candidate on the ballot). Compulsory voting is also linked to party advantage. For example, “high levels of voter turnout are believed to favor left-wing parties, as their supporters generally have lower socio-economic status, which in turn leads to a reduced likelihood of voting.” Alternatively, right-wing parties are thought to benefit from voluntary voting, as it is their voters – those who generally have a higher socio-economic status – who are more likely to turn out to vote. level of party stability. Australia has one of the highest levels of party identification in the world, meaning voters have not rejected major parties by abstaining or switching parties from one election to the next. While other countries such as the United States and Great Britain have seen associations with political parties decline sharply, Australia has generally remained immune to this phenomenon as “compulsory voting ensures that voters cast a ballot and the act of voting it means they are forced to think, however superficially, about the major parties.” Experience in Australia Every Australian citizen over the age of 18 is required by law to vote. Compulsory voting was first adopted in Queensland in 1915. At federal level it was introduced in 1924 as the Private Members Bill. Before the introduction of compulsory voting, voter turnout peaked at 78.1% in 1917. The last federal election before compulsory voting was held in 1922 and saw voter turnout fall to 57.9% . Since 1945, Australia has had voter turnout almost consistently above 90%. Numerous measures have been taken to make voting easier in Australia. For example, Election Day is always a Saturday. Voters who are outside their division but still in their home state or territory may cast an "absentee vote" at any polling station in their home state or territory. Those outside their state or territory can cast postal votes or can cast a pre-poll vote at a pre-poll voting centre. Additionally, the Australian Electoral Commission organizes mobile voting in hospitals, care homes, prisons and remote areas. One of the reasons Australia enjoys such a high voting rate is because “voting is so easy… that not voting is much more burdensome than voting. It is much easier to go to any of the numerous polling stations conveniently located on the road to the shops than to provide an excuse not to do so.” If a person does not vote, the Australian Electoral Commission will send a letter to the non-voter asking them to explain why they did not vote and to offer the recipient the opportunity to pay a fine of $20 (AU) to resolve the matter. If the recipient chooses to write a letter and his reasons are "valid and sufficient", there is no penalty. Indifference towards candidates is not a reason to abstain from voting, and the courtsAustralians have rigorously defended this decision. The court can fine a person up to $50 if the reasons for voting are deemed insufficient. If a person convicted and fined by the court decides not to pay the fine, it is up to the court to decide whether action should be taken or a further fine imposed. Any further action taken by the court is a response to not paying the fine, not to not voting. Less than 1% of the Australian electorate faces a fine or court appearance in any given election period. In general, Australians appear to support compulsory voting, although it is not without criticism. A poll conducted in 1996 found that 74% of respondents favored compulsory voting. It should be noted that in 1997, the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters recommended that if Australia was to consider itself a “mature democracy”, provisions of the electoral law providing for compulsory voting should be repealed. The Committee refuted claims that the legitimacy of Australia's election results would be undermined by voluntary voting “as virtually every other democracy in the world operates without compulsion”. Despite an increase in abstention, less than a quarter of one percent of non-voters are ever prosecuted. This may be due, in part, to the fact that “the justice system is already overloaded and gives little priority to the prosecution of non-voters. The chances of a non-voter having to appear in court are extremely low, and the fines are also quite small." Compulsory Voting: Considerations for Canada To establish a compulsory voting system in Canada, it would be necessary to establish a law binding citizens to vote. There are several ways to do this. Independent legislation could be introduced defining compulsory voting, with details and a comprehensive regime. Alternatively, changes to Canadian election law could be introduced. This would seem to be the most sensible way to institute a compulsory voting law. If we wanted to underline the importance of voting as a civic duty, it might also be desirable to amend the Penal Code to include the proposed sanction for those who do not vote. The obligation could also be written into the Constitution, as is the case in Belgium. For Canada this would not be the most efficient solution for two reasons. First, unless this law applies to provincial elections as well as federal elections, the Constitution would not be the appropriate forum. Secondly, considering the difficulties associated with constitutional amendments, there are much more suitable ways to introduce such legislation. Simply implementing a compulsory voting system may not guarantee high voter turnout, and a fine may need to be imposed for those who do not comply. the law. Typically, countries with compulsory voting, such as Australia, impose fines on those who do not vote. Other countries deny government services or benefits to non-voters. For example, in Peru a voter must carry a stamped voter card with him for a certain number of months after the election as proof of having voted. Without this stamp it may be difficult to obtain services from some public offices. While a sanction of some kind is recommended to ensure compliance with the law, it would be necessary to ensure that such a sanction does not cause undue hardship to those in a socioeconomically disadvantaged situation, whether this means excessive fines or denial of government services. In order to ensure a high rate of compliance, “it is reasonable to expect the state to make voting a relatively painless experience.”,.