On Wednesday, March 18th, President Obama floated the idea of mandatory
voting while he was speaking to a Civic Group in Cleveland. Obama was
originally asked a question involving the influence money has on U.S. elections
in which he then digressed to the topic of voting rights and he said the U.S.
should be making it easier to vote. President Obama even mentioned Australia by
saying, "Just ask Australia, the citizens have no choice but to vote. Disproportionately, Americans who skip the polls on
Election Day are younger, lower-income and more likely to be immigrants or
minorities, Obama said. "There's a reason why some folks try to keep them
away from the polls," he said in a veiled reference to voter
identification laws in a number of states. At least 26 countries have
compulsory voting, according to the Institute for Democracy and Electoral
Assistance. Failure to vote is punishable by a fine in countries such as Australia
and Belgium; if you fail to pay your fine in Belgium, you could go to prison.
Obama used these other countries as examples when he was vouching for mandatory
voting laws in front of the media. He claimed it would be transformative if
everyone voted.
I thought this was an interesting topic because of how much time we have
spent in class discussing this issue. We have talked a lot about the poor
turnout rate to the polls for younger Americans and voting turnout rates have
become more and more of an issue in our country. Although the problem of voting
turnout rates would be resolved with mandatory voting, I’m not sure if that
will actually put the right person into office. This would lead to a lot of
uneducated people being forced to the polls who most likely wont want to be
there and won’t be making the best decisions for our country as a whole.
Do you guys think there should be mandatory voting in the U.S.? Why do u
think Obama is such an advocate for mandatory voting? Will mandatory voting diminish
the democratic experience for those who take the time to think through the
issues and vote accordingly?
7 comments:
This is a very controversial topic that is very divided amongst citizens. Personally, I do not think there hold be mandatory voting in the United States. If anything, it will only cause problems or rebellions if people see this as too much governmental power. Although voter turnout rates will obviously increase if this legislation is passed, this will not ensure or take into account the best interests of our nation. Although many who support mandatory voting may think that people will be more willing to do research, in fact just the opposite will happen. If they are forced to vote, citizens will not be taking nearly as much consideration as those who voluntarily vote. Therefore although turnout may increase, these votes may cause problems if people are not researching who is running for office.
Additionally, mandatory voting will only make the race cheaper and easier for incumbents. During this process, people who are forced to vote will most likely be voting for incumbents which would thus force challengers to spend much more while campaigning. Not only is this a downside to passing this legislation, but actually implementing mandatory voting and enforcing this will cost a lot of money to reap little returns.
Sources:
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2015/03/19/obama-thinks-voting-should-be-mandatory
A mandatory voting requirement would be interesting, and is worth discussion, however, I believe it will never be implemented in the United States. Obama brought up mandatory voting when talking about the massive amount of campaign spending and use of money when running political campaigns. President Obama believes that mandatory voting would counteract the negative effects of money in elections, but I’m not so sure. I don’t see why PACs and campaigns would spend any less just because everyone has to cast a vote. Obama also believes that it would be easier to implement than eliminating the problems with money in elections. I disagree, as I think that implementing some laws to put an end to the use of PACs would be better for the nation than mandatory voting. PACs have changed the nature of elections tremendously, and have hurt the American public. Candidates focus now on satisfying corporations who funneled tons of money to them through PACs. Elections are no longer about the American public, which is definitely a problem. Eliminating the campaign spending issue to me is a much more worthwhile cause than enacting mandatory voting.
I agree with Ben, I do not foresee mandatory voting laws becoming a reality in the U.S. President Obama believes a greater turn-out in the elections will counteract the influence money and corporations have on our politics today. I'm unsure whether or not this will solve the problem. On one hand, with more American voters, the impact of corporations in politics will be diluted. On the other hand, I do not think that is the solution to PACs. Corporations do not deserve the same political treatment as U.S. citizens, and therefore they should not be able to manipulate policies to a greater degree than them. While mandatory voting may alleviate the problem, it's no solution. In addition, I do not feel that the American public will side with the idea of mandatory voting. Although I feel mandatory voting will result in a government that more closely reflects the desires of the people, there are too many Americans who understand that they're not knowledgable enough in politics to vote. For this reason, I do not think mandatory voting laws will take effect.
I agree with Ben that a mandatory voting requirement does warrant discussion. However, I believe that mandatory voting will have significant negative effects on how our government functions as a whole. As we learned earlier in the year, there are have been other nations around the world which have implemented voting mandates for the public. The results have not been good. In many cases, the voters stopped taking the election seriously and just treated voting as something they had to do to get out of a fine. At least with the system currently in place, there is no issue with voters not taking the elections seriously. I also agree with Ben that a more effective way of limiting the effects of money in elections would be to address PAC spending directly, rather then try to indirectly change spending by making mandatory voting. I also think that this law will never be able to take effect because there will be too much public outcry and resistance.
Due to the apathy of the American people towards politics, I think it is a good idea for the United States to implement mandatory voting laws. Mandatory voting in no way would compromise the democratic integrity of America. Mandatory voting laws will only make the country more democratic. The basis of the democratic theory is that everyone has an equal say. When only about 50% of the American public votes the system is not very democratic. Along with the fact that half of the county that is missing from the polls the people who do show up tend to be the more affluent. If mandatory voting were to be implement the other 50% of the general public would have to vote. Whether they choose to research the politicians running is their own choice. However it is nearly impossible these days to know nothing about the politicians who are running. The constant media coverage allows anyone to at least get a general opinion of the politician running for president. The leaders chosen would also be more representative of the people. I think that Obama like any president should be in support of mandatory voting. A democratic president, even a second term president, should want their entire country to vote for its leaders.
I agree with Ben and Owen that mandatory voting will never be a feasible option for the United States. Part of free speech is the right not to say anything at all, which includes the right to not vote. For some people, choosing not to vote is their way of making a political statement. For the vast majority of those who don't vote, it is because they are apathetic to politics - regardless, they have the right to not vote. Although mandatory voting would increase turnout rates, this is not necessarily a positive effect. As Haele noted, people who are forced to vote are unlikely to thoroughly research candidates and pick the one who is truly best suited for the job. This is a major issue because of the lack of political education in the US. I feel it is unwise to force people to vote when they are ignorant about politics. I think that Obama is an advocate for mandatory voting because he is a Democrat. Typically, the people who are underrepresented at the polls are groups like the uneducated, minorities, and the poor - all of which typically vote for Democrats. Therefore, mandatory voting would increase the proportion of these groups at the polls and improve the prospects of election for the Democratic party.
Personally, I do not agree with the idea of mandatory voting. I see the appeal of the plan: great voter turnout, more political activism and a greater representation of the population in election results. However, mandatory voting conflicts with the whole principle of democracy. The Constitution clearly states that all citizens be allowed the right to vote, and this includes the right to abstain from voting. By forcing all citizens to vote, the government would essentially be denying people a basic right. There are very few, almost no times in a democracy when the government can force a person to physically do something, like voting. Mandatory voting defies our basic freedoms. The freedom to make our own choices and to do what we want to do is what makes America the great nation that it is. The whole principle of America as ‘the land of the free’ was founded on the belief that we should be able to choose our own government, and that includes the freedom to have no say in the matter. Now I could mention hundreds of reason why a person would not vote: they could not miss work, they did not agree with any of the candidates, etc. but none of these matter. A person should not have to justify to the government why or why not they do something, this type of behavior would constitute an autocratic, ‘Big Brother’ system. Rather, if people do not want to vote, that is their right, and their justification need not be explained.
Post a Comment