Mandatory Voting

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

What are the pros and cons on making voting compulsory ?

Pros:

1. It makes people take an interest in their democracy
2. It gives greater legitimacy to the government
3. It makes politicians appeal to a broader spectrum of people

People wouldn't have to pick a candidate, all ballot papers would have to have a "none o the above" option or a simple abstention box to check.
The consequences of not voting would be a fine. Automatically added to your tax bill or deducted from you welfare check

Cons:

1. A higher turn out would probably mean voting stations would need to stay open longer
2. A secure postal system of voting would be required for all elections to allow those who can't travel to vote

States would be mandated to register all eligible voters
Eligible voters = all citizens and LEGAL residents over the age of 18.

A last thought, if you object to mandatory voting, do you also object to mandatory participation in the jury system ?

swing_voter · Jun 5, 2020

No republican would ever get elected again.

There's more democrats than republicans.

31% of Americans identified as Democrats, 30% identified as Republican, and 36% as Independent

Well, maybe in some areas republicans would win an election or two.

Mycroft · Jun 5, 2020

Rich2018 said:
What are the pros and cons on making voting compulsory ?

Pros:

1. It makes people take an interest in their democracy
2. It gives greater legitimacy to the government
3. It makes politicians appeal to a broader spectrum of people

People wouldn't have to pick a candidate, all ballot papers would have to have a "none o the above" option or a simple abstention box to check.
The consequences of not voting would be a fine. Automatically added to your tax bill or deducted from you welfare check

Cons:

1. A higher turn out would probably mean voting stations would need to stay open longer
2. A secure postal system of voting would be required for all elections to allow those who can't travel to vote

States would be mandated to register all eligible voters
Eligible voters = all citizens and LEGAL residents over the age of 18.

A last thought, if you object to mandatory voting, do you also object to mandatory participation in the jury system ?

The biggest con to your notion is that it would require a Constitutional Amendment. That is very difficult to enact...and rightfully so.

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

swing_voter said:
No republican would ever get elected again.

Is that a "pro" or a "con"

Or more accurately, no Republican spouting the Trumpist extreme politics would ever get elected again...and they'd have to moderate their policies

There's more democrats than republicans.

31% of Americans identified as Democrats, 30% identified as Republican, and 36% as Independent

So we'd get a Congress more representative of society

Well, maybe in some areas republicans would win an election or two.

Like Oklahoma.

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

Mycroft said:
The biggest con to your notion is that it would require a Constitutional Amendment. That is very difficult to enact...and rightfully so.

No, that's a barrier to getting such a system enacted, not on con of it.

Terryj · Jun 5, 2020

First of all, it is the right of every person 18 and over who are U.S. citizens to vote. Second, it is also the right of every U.S. citizen 18 and over not to vote. To make voting mandatory, the government is forcing a person to do something they choose not to do and in the United States we do value our rights, be they positive or negative.

Second, the voting is done at a State level, the federal government has no say so in the voting process with the exception of setting the day when elections are held. You would have to get the States to make voting mandatory.

Ignatius · Jun 5, 2020

Rich2018 said:
What are the pros and cons on making voting compulsory ?

Pros:

1. It makes people take an interest in their democracy
2. It gives greater legitimacy to the government
3. It makes politicians appeal to a broader spectrum of people

People wouldn't have to pick a candidate, all ballot papers would have to have a "none o the above" option or a simple abstention box to check.
The consequences of not voting would be a fine. Automatically added to your tax bill or deducted from you welfare check

Cons:

1. A higher turn out would probably mean voting stations would need to stay open longer
2. A secure postal system of voting would be required for all elections to allow those who can't travel to vote

States would be mandated to register all eligible voters
Eligible voters = all citizens and LEGAL residents over the age of 18.

A last thought, if you object to mandatory voting, do you also object to mandatory participation in the jury system ?

Good topic.

The biggest problem I see is it turns a right on it a govt mandate. I have a problem with govt mandates no matter what its for. As for the jury thing I hate it. I have been chosen for 5 juries in my life. There must be a check mark next to my name or something.

Also i am not sure people would necessarily take an interest in their democracy. If they aren't now when it voluntary I don't think they would be more inclined to be if it was mandated.

I have no major disagreement with the rest and especially like the LEGAL citizen condition.

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

Terryj said:
First of all, it is the right of every person 18 and over who are U.S. citizens to vote. Second, it is also the right of every U.S. citizen 18 and over not to vote.

But it is not the right of every citizen over 18 not to participate in the justice system

And no-one would make them vote, they could either check "none of the above" or just register their attendance at the polling station and walk out

To make voting mandatory, the government is forcing a person to do something they choose not to do...

Like serve on a jury against their will ?

Like register for military service

Like be drafted and fight in a foreign war against their will

Like complete a Census form against their will

Second, the voting is done at a State level, the federal government has no say so in the voting process with the exception of setting the day when elections are held. You would have to get the States to make voting mandatory.

You would have to pass a constitutional amendment, yes.

Jason Warfield · Jun 5, 2020

Let's get the hypothetical out of the way and say that a Constitutional Amendment passes to allow it to happen. Just for the sake of argument.

Pros -

The GOP would most likely become a minority party.
The GOP, in the long-term, would be able to clean house and get rid of idiots like Trump and McConnell and rebuild the party and make it saner.

THE DNC would gain power in the short term and be able to do some initial, return to common sense government to reverse the damage done by Trump and those who support him.
The DNC, in the long-term is going to have to have the moderates, Blue Dogs and progressives come together to make a stronger party.

There will be a rise in third parties. My feeling is that if everyone is forced to vote, then voices will be heard and parties will be created around them. What this means is that both the GOP and DNC will suffer from splintering, reducing each party's power further (making the GOP, even more of a minority party). While the third parties may not be as powerful as the DNC or even reduced GOP...they will be able to get votes and candidates elected at various levels to help shape policy. Something third parties don't really get to do now. BTW, I'm a Democrat and I would continue to stay as one (most likely), but I am not adverse to the people havong a larger selection of those who will listen to them.

This will put the final nail in the coffin of the absurd notion of systemic voter fraud the GOP keeps harping on about. There will have to be a federal agency that approves the voter rolls from the states. There will be a singular, final authority on who can and cannot vote. The states will still be able to carry on voting the way they wish, it is just that the voter rolls have to be finalized by an agency that should only report to...the Supreme Court. The executive branch can nominate who leads it, as can Congress, Congress will approve the candidate. But the agency resides inside the judicial branch, away from executive and Congressional meddling.

Number of polling stations will increase.

Gerrymandering will not be as powerful of a tool as it has been (but it will still exist and be somewhat obnoxious).

States will be forced to be more precise in how they keep voter rolls up to date. And transparent.

Cons -

We are going to have to paid for the agency stated above. As well as on the local level to fulfill the voter roll requirement. It also means that money will be spent to ensure voting happens, we have to be clear on various exceptions per state like soldiers voting from overseas, etc. All of that is going to take money and people to make it happen.

States are going to have to raise taxes to do their part to make sure voter rolls are complete and accurate.

How to punish those who refuse to vote. Here's a not-so-great question: if you refuse to vote, should your right vote be taken away?

What if the ballot literally has pi$$-poor candidates only and other things that are awful?

Those are from the top of my head, I'm sure there are other pros and cons out there as well.

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

Ignatius said:
Good topic.

I used to be dead against mandatory voting but now I favor it
Actually just making the states register everyone and make everyone get off their @ss and go to a voting station (that's all they wouldn't have to actually check a box if they don't want to, but they'd have to at least show up, no excuses)

The biggest problem I see is it turns a right on it a govt mandate. I have a problem with govt mandates no matter what its for. As for the jury thing I hate it. I have been chosen for 5 juries in my life. There must be a check mark next to my name or something.

Also i am not sure people would necessarily take an interest in their democracy. If they aren't now when it voluntary I don't think they would be more inclined to be if it was mandated.

I think a lot of people complain about the government, this would eliminate a lot of those complaints from people who don't actually vote.
There's a lot of people who do vote for stupid reasons, so the donkey vote argument is invalid IMO

I think making people perform a civic duty (as voting would be seen to become) will invest them more in government and politicians would have to address them and not the demographic who votes as is the case now.

Lastly, it's not actually an arduous burden to place on citizens to go to a voting station once every two years.

I think it would reduce apathy and make people feel a part of society, not some view that they are not part of it.

I have no major disagreement with the rest and especially like the LEGAL citizen condition.[/QUOTE]

Ignatius · Jun 5, 2020

Rich2018 said:
I used to be dead against mandatory voting but now I favor it
Actually just making the states register everyone and make everyone get off their @ss and go to a voting station (that's all they wouldn't have to actually check a box if they don't want to, but they'd have to at least show up, no excuses)

I think a lot of people complain about the government, this would eliminate a lot of those complaints from people who don't actually vote.
There's a lot of people who do vote for stupid reasons, so the donkey vote argument is invalid IMO

I think making people perform a civic duty (as voting would be seen to become) will invest them more in government and politicians would have to address them and not the demographic who votes as is the case now.

Lastly, it's not actually an arduous burden to place on citizens to go to a voting station once every two years.

I think it would reduce apathy and make people feel a part of society, not some view that they are not part of it.

I have no major disagreement with the rest and especially like the LEGAL citizen condition.

[/QUOTE]

No idea what a "donkey vote" is.

I see your point about making people get up and out and maybe that will eventually get them more interested but I still don't like govt mandates. They should be very rare in my opinion.

As for people complaining about the govt I usually ask if they vote and if they say "No" I tell them they arent entitled to an opinion and ignore them.

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

Jason Warfield said:
Let's get the hypothetical out of the way and say that a Constitutional Amendment passes to allow it to happen. Just for the sake of argument.

Pros -

The GOP would most likely become a minority party.
The GOP, in the long-term, would be able to clean house and get rid of idiots like Trump and McConnell and rebuild the party and make it saner.

THE DNC would gain power in the short term and be able to do some initial, return to common sense government to reverse the damage done by Trump and those who support him.
The DNC, in the long-term is going to have to have the moderates, Blue Dogs and progressives come together to make a stronger party.

There will be a rise in third parties. My feeling is that if everyone is forced to vote, then voices will be heard and parties will be created around them. What this means is that both the GOP and DNC will suffer from splintering, reducing each party's power further (making the GOP, even more of a minority party). While the third parties may not be as powerful as the DNC or even reduced GOP...they will be able to get votes and candidates elected at various levels to help shape policy. Something third parties don't really get to do now. BTW, I'm a Democrat and I would continue to stay as one (most likely), but I am not adverse to the people havong a larger selection of those who will listen to them.

This will put the final nail in the coffin of the absurd notion of systemic voter fraud the GOP keeps harping on about. There will have to be a federal agency that approves the voter rolls from the states. There will be a singular, final authority on who can and cannot vote. The states will still be able to carry on voting the way they wish, it is just that the voter rolls have to be finalized by an agency that should only report to...the Supreme Court. The executive branch can nominate who leads it, as can Congress, Congress will approve the candidate. But the agency resides inside the judicial branch, away from executive and Congressional meddling.

Number of polling stations will increase.

Gerrymandering will not be as powerful of a tool as it has been (but it will still exist and be somewhat obnoxious).

States will be forced to be more precise in how they keep voter rolls up to date. And transparent.

Cons -

We are going to have to paid for the agency stated above. As well as on the local level to fulfill the voter roll requirement. It also means that money will be spent to ensure voting happens, we have to be clear on various exceptions per state like soldiers voting from overseas, etc. All of that is going to take money and people to make it happen.

States are going to have to raise taxes to do their part to make sure voter rolls are complete and accurate.

How to punish those who refuse to vote. Here's a not-so-great question: if you refuse to vote, should your right vote be taken away?

What if the ballot literally has pi$$-poor candidates only and other things that are awful?

Those are from the top of my head, I'm sure there are other pros and cons out there as well.

Yes, I think this GOP (as it is now) would suffer and either become a RW protest party or moderate its message by moving to the center and ditch nationalists like Trump

The party in government would probably swing slightly to the left and perhaps a third or even fourth party would emerge and we'd see a coalition government.

Elections will cost more - I would move them to a weekend to ensure a better turnout - maybe even allow the election over two days. I'm not sure about too big a cost as all voters would already be on a tax or jury duty list. It also removes the need for a 10 yearly census.

Lastly, no-one should be forced at gun point into the voting booth - all that is required is that you register your attendance at the voting station

As I said above, I don't think asking citizens to get off their couch and to an voting station once every couple of years is too onerous.

Jason Warfield · Jun 5, 2020

Rich2018 said:
Yes, I think this GOP (as it is now) would suffer and either become a RW protest party or moderate its message by moving to the center and ditch nationalists like Trump

The party in government would probably swing slightly to the left and perhaps a third or even fourth party would emerge and we'd see a coalition government.

Elections will cost more - I would move them to a weekend to ensure a better turnout - maybe even allow the election over two days. I'm not sure about too big a cost as all voters would already be on a tax or jury duty list. It also removes the need for a 10 yearly census.

Lastly, no-one should be forced at gun point into the voting booth - all that is required is that you register your attendance at the voting station

As I said above, I don't think asking citizens to get off their couch and to an voting station once every couple of years is too onerous.

I like your idea of moving elections to a weekend.

bomberfox · Jun 5, 2020

I dont see how mandatory voting magically makes people more interested in the system, this will fix absolutely nothing. Hows about instead of blaming the voters, we fix the rigged ass districting system and fix legal bribery first. I cannot see how punishing people for not voting will do anything and i dont believe not voting should constitute a crime.

bomberfox · Jun 5, 2020

Rich2018 said:
Yes, I think this GOP (as it is now) would suffer and either become a RW protest party or moderate its message by moving to the center and ditch nationalists like Trump

The party in government would probably swing slightly to the left and perhaps a third or even fourth party would emerge and we'd see a coalition government.

Elections will cost more - I would move them to a weekend to ensure a better turnout - maybe even allow the election over two days. I'm not sure about too big a cost as all voters would already be on a tax or jury duty list. It also removes the need for a 10 yearly census.

Lastly, no-one should be forced at gun point into the voting booth - all that is required is that you register your attendance at the voting station

As I said above, I don't think asking citizens to get off their couch and to an voting station once every couple of years is too onerous.

I feel this tackles the wrong issue and punishes people for no good reason.

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

Ignatius said:
No idea what a "donkey vote" is.

Sorry it's an Australian term (they've had mandatory voting for many years now) and it's a reference to the children's party game of pin the tail on the donkey...closing your eyes and checking against a random candidate

I see your point about making people get up and out and maybe that will eventually get them more interested but I still don't like govt mandates. They should be very rare in my opinion.

Let's just make it for presidential and congressional elections at first

I think it would both radically alter the political landscape and the attitudes of the apathetic section of the people. I think people will actually vote in their best interests come election day and not just for the first name on the ballot paper.

As for people complaining about the govt I usually ask if they vote and if they say "No" I tell them they arent entitled to an opinion and ignore them.

Well those people would be very rare and secondly it adds legitimacy to a government

If turnout is anything like Australian levels, the government can really claim to have a mandate from the people.

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

Jason Warfield said:
I like your idea of moving elections to a weekend.

The French have had their presidential elections on a Sunday for years.

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

bomberfox said:
I feel this tackles the wrong issue and punishes people for no good reason.

Where is the "punishment"

Getting people to do what they should be doing

We should also punish parents if they don't send their children to school.

justabubba · Jun 5, 2020

Rich2018 said:
Where is the "punishment"

what happens when the compelled voters, those who would not vote voluntarily, continue not to vote?

Getting people to do what they should be doing

there are members of religious groups who believe voting is a sin. are you going to compel them to violate their religious convictions? are you going to punish them for refusing to follow their religious convictions?

We should also punish parents if they don't send their children to school.

we have another - home school - option. that allows parents NOT to send their children to school
and if the parents' belief system is opposed to vaccination, then their unvaccinated children will be prohibited from attending the schools

what is the point of forcing people who choose not to vote, to vote?
i thought you were a supporter of "choice"; now you would have that choice taken away because it is not a choice you would make

seems like a hypocritical position to take

bomberfox · Jun 5, 2020

Rich2018 said:
Where is the "punishment"

Getting people to do what they should be doing

We should also punish parents if they don't send their children to school.

....... *facepalm* if you cant tell the difference between punishing citizens for not exercising a right and truancy i cant help you

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

justabubba said:
what happens when the compelled voters, those who would not vote voluntarily, continue not to vote?

They would get a fine - automatically added to their tax bill or deducted from their welfare check

No huge fine - something like $20

there are members of religious groups who believe voting is a sin. are you going to compel them to violate their religious convictions? are you going to punish them for refusing to follow their religious convictions?

Who are they ?
Do they also believe that jury service is a sin, and if so are they exempted ?

And again, no-one would force you to vote, just attend a voting station and get checked off

we have another - home school - option. that allows parents NOT to send their children to school

IMO, this should not be allowed unless in rare circumstances and should be regularly tested

and if the parents' belief system is opposed to vaccination, then their unvaccinated children will be prohibited from attending the schools

Then the children should be seized by social services and forcibly vaccinated

what is the point of forcing people who choose not to vote, to vote?

To increase participation in the electoral system

i thought you were a supporter of "choice"; now you would have that choice taken away because it is not a choice you would make

seems like a hypocritical position to take

Why ?

No-one would force anyone to vote, merely attend a voting station on election day.

bomberfox · Jun 5, 2020

So basically ignore all institutional problems with voting and representation then say vote or else! Soundsnlike a plan! For disaster

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

bomberfox said:
....... *facepalm* if you cant tell the difference between punishing citizens for not exercising a right and truancy i cant help you

What is the difference ?

What is the "punishment" for citizens who're made to attend a voting station on election day ?

They can record any TV show they miss.

Metanoia · Jun 5, 2020

Jason Warfield said:
There will be a rise in third parties. My feeling is that if everyone is forced to vote, then voices will be heard and parties will be created around them. What this means is that both the GOP and DNC will suffer from splintering, reducing each party's power further (making the GOP, even more of a minority party). While the third parties may not be as powerful as the DNC or even reduced GOP...they will be able to get votes and candidates elected at various levels to help shape policy. Something third parties don't really get to do now. BTW, I'm a Democrat and I would continue to stay as one (most likely), but I am not adverse to the people havong a larger selection of those who will listen to them.

This is the point that is appealing. A multi-party system would necessitate more cooperation between lawmakers. There is no in between with two parties......it is just either/or

Rich2018 · Jun 5, 2020

bomberfox said:
So basically ignore all institutional problems with voting and representation then say vote or else! Soundsnlike a plan! For disaster

Actually attend a voting station on election day or face a $20 fine

Not exactly onerous is it, not exactly Alcatraz either.

Mandatory Voting

Rich2018

swing_voter

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.

Rich2018

Rich2018

Terryj

Ignatius

Well-known member

Rich2018

Jason Warfield

Rich2018

Ignatius

Well-known member

Rich2018

Jason Warfield

bomberfox

bomberfox

Rich2018

Rich2018

Rich2018

justabubba

long standing member

bomberfox

Rich2018

bomberfox

Rich2018

Metanoia

Rich2018