• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the US have complusory voting?

Should the US have compulsory voting?


  • Total voters
    34
Well...if most people want compulsory voting...wouldn't establishing compulsory voting then be democratic?
Yes, and slavery was democratic as well. And if most people want government to abolish freedom of speech it would also be democratic. But we have a Republic, and under our Constitution compulsory voting on the federal level is not permissible.

Have you heard of tyranny of the majority?
 
Last edited:
Do you remember a certain election in which man named Bush beat out a man named Gore without actually carrying the popular vote?

Sure, but neither of them had unacceptably low approval ratings at the time, so that example doesn't qualify. And in any case, compulsory voting would not prevent the occasional quirk of the electoral college from occurring.
 
Last edited:
I'm starting to think we should require that people vote. If you don't vote you should get fined. It's not a very libertarian position, but given how few eligible Americans actually vote, I doubt that the majority is very well represented. The fines don't even have to be high, since most people will turn up to vote just to avoid the hassle of paying one. And it works! It increases voter turnout by as much as 16%!

The following countries have enforced compulsory voting....

Argentina
Australia
Brazil
Chile
Ecuador
Fiji
Liechtenstein
Nauru
Peru
Singapore
Uruguay

Not exactly a list of totalitarian regimes.

I wouldnt mind it at all.
Not sure about the fines?
And as long as the option "none of the above" is available Im fine that. Or a fill in the blank.

would we also go to straight one to one voting?
 
I'm starting to think we should require that people vote. If you don't vote you should get fined. It's not a very libertarian position, but given how few eligible Americans actually vote, I doubt that the majority is very well represented. The fines don't even have to be high, since most people will turn up to vote just to avoid the hassle of paying one. And it works! It increases voter turnout by as much as 16%!

The following countries have enforced compulsory voting....

Argentina
Australia
Brazil
Chile
Ecuador
Fiji
Liechtenstein
Nauru
Peru
Singapore
Uruguay

Not exactly a list of totalitarian regimes.

So you want people who otherwise wouldn't give two ****s about politics to be forced to go vote? You do not think this would have disastrous effects. Its bad enough we have morons who think Obama is going to pay their bills voting and other politically ignorant people voting. I do not want that number increased. Plus one of the points of democracy is that you have a choice in whether or no you want to vote. Considering our two party monopoly and the fact that both the media and many states squeeze out 3rd parties I do not want to be force to vote for a douche bag or turd sandwich.
 
Because of compulsory voting? I don't think so. And those are exceptions to the list of countries you mentioned.

North Korea and Iran don't have compulsory voting. :mrgreen:
 
Why don't you care?

Part of the reason is because I do not live in the district I vote in since I am in college. Another reason is Water Management Backup Carrier, while I made it up, people do run for stuff like that. Like I don't care who does that job. I do pay attention to City Council and School Board and those type of things, but for the district I live in it seems like 60% of the ballot is stuff like Water Management Backup Carrier.

Plus if you force people to vote, do you not make them more turned off by the process because they have to?
 
So you want people who otherwise wouldn't give two ****s about politics to be forced to go vote? You do not think this would have disastrous effects. Its bad enough we have morons who think Obama is going to pay their bills voting and other politically ignorant people voting. I do not want that number increased. Plus one of the points of democracy is that you have a choice in whether or no you want to vote. Considering our two party monopoly and the fact that both the media and many states squeeze out 3rd parties I do not want to be force to vote for a douche bag or turd sandwich.

Once people get involved in politics they will get interested in politics. When the guy they vote for screws them over, they will learn to care who they vote for in this wonderful thing called conditioning. It is painful but necessary.
 
Jury duty is compulsory so why shouldn'r voting be if you are registered to vote.
 
Plus if you force people to vote, do you not make them more turned off by the process because they have to?

Nope. Humans have a cognitive bias where they tend to believe if they do nothing it will have no consequences but if they do something it will have consequences. That bias forces them to think about decisions when they are forced to make them.
 
Once people get involved in politics they will get interested in politics.

I don't think it necessarily follows. If they are forced to vote, that doesn't necessarily mean they will be interested in politics. They may just minimally fill out their ballot and be done with it.

When the guy they vote for screws them over, they will learn to care who they vote for in this wonderful thing called conditioning. It is painful but necessary.

Except that the system will still be closed off to true political competition. And in that case, you have the Republocrats. They may not care when the guy they vote for screws them over if they expect both candidates to screw them over.
 
Except that the system will still be closed off to true political competition. And in that case, you have the Republocrats. They may not care when the guy they vote for screws them over if they expect both candidates to screw them over.

To be honest with ya, I'm thinking compulsory voting would actually kill the two party system. I don't believe a single country that has compulsory voting has a two party system like the United States has.
 
Jury duty is compulsory so why shouldn'r voting be if you are registered to vote.

Yeah, and you see how seriously the vast majority of America takes jury duty.
 
I wouldnt mind it at all.
Not sure about the fines?
And as long as the option "none of the above" is available Im fine that. Or a fill in the blank.

would we also go to straight one to one voting?

One to one?
 
To be honest with ya, I'm thinking compulsory voting would actually kill the two party system. I don't believe a single country that has compulsory voting has a two party system like the United States has.

They system is currently set up to promote only a 2 party system. Other candidates are not allowed to participate as well as the main candidates and face serious uphill battles to even be recognized. So what dynamic in your system would break that?
 
North Korea and Iran don't have compulsory voting. :mrgreen:
-_- they are not republics or democracies.

Either way, listing those countries in no way supports the argument that compulsory voting helps a country because:
1. Most of those countries are not in great shape, and those that are are the exception.
2. There is no evidence the condition of those countries has anything to do with compulsory voting.
 
Once people get involved in politics they will get interested in politics. When the guy they vote for screws them over, they will learn to care who they vote for in this wonderful thing called conditioning. It is painful but necessary.

The people who are politically ignorant right now do not get involved in politics so why would forcing people who do not want anything to do with it make them want to become more informed?
 
Yeah, and you see how seriously the vast majority of America takes jury duty.


The State, County can come out and pick you up and or fine you.
 
The people who are politically ignorant right now do not get involved in politics so why would forcing people who do not want anything to do with it make them want to become more informed?

Humans have a cognitive bias where they tend to believe if they do nothing it will have no consequences but if they do something it will have consequences. That bias forces them to think about decisions when they are forced to make them.
 
Nope. Humans have a cognitive bias where they tend to believe if they do nothing it will have no consequences but if they do something it will have consequences. That bias forces them to think about decisions when they are forced to make them.

Right, but my point is if you make people vote that don't want to then are they not just more likely to just press buttons in order to do it and get it done with rather than make an informed decision?
 
We do a pretty good job.

Are you sure? I've seen the jury selection process and known many whom have gone through it. The main goal is to get dismissed, not serve. It's viewed as a pain in the ass and not much more.
 
To be honest with ya, I'm thinking compulsory voting would actually kill the two party system. I don't believe a single country that has compulsory voting has a two party system like the United States has.

Forcing people to vote would not get rid of the two party monopoly for the simple fact its name recognition with the help of the media and money that gets a candidate elected.
 
We do a pretty good job.
Most people try to get out of jury duty. I have a friend who always pretends to be racist so she is never called back. People don't take it seriously at all.

Since when does forcing a person against his will to do something make him enjoy what he is being forced to do any more than before?

So far, these are your main arguments:
1. If people want compulsory voting, because of democracy they should get it.
-No, because we have a constitutional republic, so the majority cannot just get what they want if it infringes on rights. By your logic, if the majority wants slavery, they should be able to get it.

2. Compulsory voting decreases apathy and makes people more involved in politics.
-zero evidence of this. People are forced into jury duty and everyone hates it. In fact, most people try to get out of it. Nobody is interested in jury duty because it is mandatory, and I would argue they dislike it even more because it is mandatory. Jury duty is an excellent example of why compulsory voting will not increase interest in politics. All it will do is increase voter turn out, for obvious reasons. Voter turnout and political interest are not synonymous.

3. We have a 2 party system because there is no compulsory voting.
-Completely bogus. Europe does not have compulsory voting, yet nearly every European country has a multiparty system. Compulsory voting has nothing to do with that. If people are uninterested in politics because of limited choice, rather than force them to choose between two evils maybe you should push for reforms that expand the role of third parties. And by the way, Australia basically has a two party system, for the most part. There is no correlation between the number of parties present and compulsory voting.

Not to mention compulsory voting is unconstitutional.
 
Last edited:
We have enough idiots voting. Lets not add the lethargic to that list.
 
Back
Top Bottom