[ddeck]

>I would not call a country a democracy if they don't make it easy for everyone to participate in the election

Agreed. I'd go one step further and advocate compulsory voting (at least compulsory turning up). Even for the most civic minded, it's not difficult to end up with unexpected other obligations on the day and defaulting to a "oh well, one vote wont make a difference" mindset.

Compulsory voting also forces all employers to accommodate their employees going to vote.

Growing up in Australia, I didn't realize for some time that Australia was somewhat of an anomaly in the developed world in this regard.

I'm curious if anyone has seen any research on what the impact of compulsory voting would likely be in the US with respect to the major parties.

[TelmoMenezes]

Assuming that it is illegal to prevent someone from voting, what problem is this compulsory voting meant to solve?

It feels like totalitarianism to me. What if I feel that a certain election is a sham, and prefer not to participate? Democratic regimes should be sane enough so that people want to vote. Too many people not wanting to vote should be taken as a signal that something is seriously wrong.

[xorcist]

> What if I feel that a certain election is a sham, and prefer not to participate?

That's when you turn in a blank vote (void or null vote). If you just don't show up for voting you won't affect the outcome but if there is a large number of blank votes, that will be a signal something is wrong.

[cyphar]

> It feels like totalitarianism to me. What if I feel that a certain election is a sham, and prefer not to participate? Democratic regimes should be sane enough so that people want to vote. Too many people not wanting to vote should be taken as a signal that something is seriously wrong.

I disagree. Compulsory voting is incredibly important, because it ensures that everyone is represented. You can even enter a blank or invalid vote if you think the election is a sham. People who claim that "those who don't care about politics shouldn't vote" don't believe in a true democracy. In a true democracy you don't accept that 30-40% of your population is not represented because they didn't show up to vote.

[tibiapejagala]

> Compulsory voting is incredibly important, because it ensures that everyone is represented.

So let's assume that voting in compulsory in the US this year, and everyone actually shows up to vote. After the election, results come up:

  XX% Clinton
  YY% Trump
  Z% Johnson

The results obviously would be different if voting haven't been compulsory. That would be:

  AA% Clinton
  BB% Trump
  C% Johnson

I fail to see how this ensured that everyone is represented.

[cyphar]

Where XX% + YY% + Z% < 60%. Everyone's view has been represented! While you might not be able to vote for "random candidate X", that's a deeper issue in the American voting system. But it doesn't invalidate that compulsory voting does ensure that everyone's view of the candidates in question is represented.

[facetube]

Out of curiosity, how would you enforce compulsory voting, and what would you consider acceptable penalties for non-participation?

[cyphar]

For a first time offender, there's a $20 fine. For multiple-time offenders it's a higher fine. In addition, we offer many alternative ways of voting. We have postal voting open for >2 months before the election and are due a week after election. In addition, voting booths are open for several weeks before the election to allow for early voters. Identity verification is pretty lax, so you don't need to carry your passport everywhere. And "donkey" or null voting are well-known techniques for abstaining from a vote. And if you're in another state and don't have a postal ballot, you can vote at another state's voting booth.

All of this results in a >95% voter turnout. Which I think is pretty damn good.

[davegardner]

In Australia it's only a $20 fine (approx US$15) for not voting.

[UlyssesSKrunk]

>Assuming that it is illegal to prevent someone from voting, what problem is this compulsory voting meant to solve?

Apathy and laziness. Plus in the us there have been quite a few states which try to pass laws for the sole purpose of making it more difficult for certain groups, usually minorities, to vote. Making voting voting compulsory would do a lot to solve that.

>It feels like totalitarianism to me.

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. If anything it's forced democracy and not even remotely close to totalitarianism. There are tons of things citizens are forced to do, file taxes, sign up for selective service, serve on a jury which costs jurors money if they are chosen, etc. Forcing people to go to a voting place once every 4 years is pretty light comparatively.

>What if I feel that a certain election is a sham, and prefer not to participate?

What I've heard from Australians is that a common thing there is spoiling your ballet if you don't want to vote.

>Too many people not wanting to vote should be taken as a signal that something is seriously wrong.

That I heartily agree with. I personally don't vote because I live in Illinois so my vote means nothing. That's a serious problem caused by a horribly inefficient and outdated system. Right now a vast majority of Americans have no power in elections, it always comes down to a very small number of swing states, usually less than 15. Live in 70% of the states? Well tough shit, what you want doesn't matter at all. That imo is the fundamental problem. I think if we switch from possibly the worst voting method to just a straight democratic vote, ignoring all the superior voting methods just sticking with FPTP, we would see much greater turnout.

[killbrad]

"I personally don't vote because I live in Illinois so my vote means nothing."

So you only vote in presidential election years, and only fill out the ballot for the presidential candidate? I think you might be doing it wrong.

[TelmoMenezes]

> Apathy and laziness.

Apathy is a valid position. Let them not vote. So what?

> Plus in the us there have been quite a few states which try to pass laws for the sole purpose of making it more difficult for certain groups, usually minorities, to vote. Making voting voting compulsory would do a lot to solve that.

Yes, then make laws to solve the real problem.

> I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. If anything it's forced democracy and not even remotely close to totalitarianism.

It's not only forcing democracy but the current flavor of it, no matter how sick it is.

> What I've heard from Australians is that a common thing there is spoiling your ballet if you don't want to vote.

Right. In my country people always say that too. In the end the media reports mostly on participation levels, while blank votes are a minor footnote at 3am.

[afarrell]

> so my vote means nothing

Illinois has elections for things other than the US presidential electors.

[em3rgent0rdr]

Some people have moral objections to voting. For example the Voluntaryists believe that all human action should be voluntary, and therefore refuse to compel people to vote, and also reject the institution of law itself.

[mcv]

I'm not so sure compulsory voting is a great idea. It's likely to encourage protest votes to extremist parties. Belgium has compulsory voting, and many think that that's a big reason why their racist party was big long before those in other European countries. (Of course nowadays they're all big, so it doesn't matter much anymore.)