Should Voting Be Compulsory?

I was just reading about how in some countries voting is compulsory, with various punishments imposed for those who do not vote (fines, deprivation of government services, freezing of bank accounts etc).

What do you guys think about it?

Is voting a duty or a right?

It's a right, I shouldn't have to pick sides in my opinion.

Plus to be punished for not voting is shocking (What if i was seriously ill during the voting period?)

'Hmmm... making voting compulsory instead of just optional...' The CMC -- resident realpolitik radical and revolutionary -- mused, '...Perhaps that would not be such a horrid fate.'

'And maybe it's just as bad as blocking voting rights -- part of the REASON democratic voting systems exist is to give the people CONTROL over their rights, and part of that control exists in the form of being able to choose NOT to vote.' Benedict countered.

'Perhaps a balance between the two?' Haid offered, tuning her harp strings -- not to tight, but not too loose, 'Instead of punishing those who fail to vote, rewarding those who DO. Maybe a monetary reward, or in each election they vote in, giving a tiny tax break, such as a fraction of a percentage off, and if one votes in every election, it adds up to a full single percent.'

The CMC, being her master, sent Haid a silencing look.

'The reward for voting lies in whom is elected and the policies they make that improve the government.' He said, simply. To her credit, Haid was not one to be silenced without her consent.

'Unless the ones elected will impose policies that make life hard for the civilians -- especially in the lower classes.' She pointed out, 'And, besides, it would provide incentive for people to not just vote -- which, theoretically, can be done just at random and not picking a real opinion -- but to learn enough to make a good, informed decision.'

'Or maybe to revamp the voting system, and instead of voting for people, voting on issues with what you want -- maybe even scrapping the system of electing officials and just the people voting directing on the laws?' Benedict offered, 'Which might be impractical, but it would make the voting of all citizens even more important and give even more incentive.'

"...I guess you guys aren't going to want ME to say anything, are you?" Jack asked, feeling distinctly shut out.

I just voted in the primary election for the first time in my life and, in my case, I really wanted to vote for certain candidates. With that being said, however, I also saw the names of candidates I never heard or knew much about. Some of these "unknown" candidates were the only options for certain positions. So I chose not to vote for any of them, in that case.


The problem with forcing people to vote, by law, is that people might not have a strong opinion on a certain candidate. So if they're forced to vote but they don't care who gets elected, then a good majority of the votes received would be thoughtless.

Shouldn't voting be a mindful decision to support the candidate you really want elected? In that case, it shouldn't be a "guessing game", which it would be if people were all forced to vote.

I agree with SeanChing. Voting only means something if you know who you're voting for. Voting is a right. If you make it mandatory then Mickey Mouse will just end up with double the votes he did before.

Jedi Believe:
(fourth in the list)
In the importance of democracy within religious, political and other structures.

V-Tog wrote: Is voting a duty or a right?

Perhaps we could pose the question thus :

Is there a significant difference between an irresponsibly executed duty and an irresponsibly exercised right ?

Have we ever known democracy ? Do elections make for democracy ? Are people willing to take the responsibility for informing themselves adequately enough to vote well ? Or to critically discern if those elected are performing well ?



If government is to be of, by and for the people, then the people must be responsible for its quality or lack thereof -- not the elected public servants. If not, the tyranny of the majority becomes a more gruesome menace to Liberty than any dictatorship ...

Sapadu wrote: 'Perhaps a balance between the two?' Haid offered, tuning her harp strings -- not to tight, but not too loose, 'Instead of punishing those who fail to vote, rewarding those who DO.

I thought the reward would be that you get the person you vote for elected Of course not guaranteed...

I don't at all think that voting should be compulsory. Maybe it will engage people more, but it is my view that if people wanted to engage then they will vote...

If someone isn't interested then they aren't interested. You can't make them be interested

There are some things in this country (UK) that are compulsory, going to school up until you are 16 for example, but seeing as you must be an adult then I would trust that an adult would be able to make their own informed decision about whether they wanted to vote and wouldn't need to be told they had to

It is my right to choose what I want to do in my life. The fewer times that someone forces me to do something the better in my view

In response to Alex. That 'Jedi Believe' is actually a non-binding statement. We believe in the 'importance of democracy' but doesn't mean that we have to actually practise it. Especially since we're actually a meritocracy in this community as well

But before we get onto that debate there are advantages and disadvantages with all forms of government irrespective of what they are

SeanChing wrote: I just voted in the primary election for the first time in my life and, in my case, I really wanted to vote for certain candidates. With that being said, however, I also saw the names of candidates I never heard or knew much about. Some of these "unknown" candidates were the only options for certain positions. So I chose not to vote for any of them, in that case.


The problem with forcing people to vote, by law, is that people might not have a strong opinion on a certain candidate. So if they're forced to vote but they don't care who gets elected, then a good majority of the votes received would be thoughtless.

Shouldn't voting be a mindful decision to support the candidate you really want elected? In that case, it shouldn't be a "guessing game", which it would be if people were all forced to vote.

Of course, a good many of votes these days (at least in the US) are thoughtless anyway. Should the vote of someone who took the time to educate themselves on the pros and cons of both candidates count the same as someone who vote a specific way simply because they think that particular candidate looks "hot" or the media makes one or the other out to be more evil than Hitler?

Many times, even with voting being voluntary, it turns into a "guessing game" unless you are willing to go far out of your way to do the research and find out the whole truth about the candidates instead of going with the half truths you see in campaign ads and on the news.

To answer the question though, I think it should be up to the individual nation to decide whether it should or shouldn't be compulsory. Maybe put it to a vote among the people, and require 100% participation? (little joke) Seriously, what works for one area may not works for another.

To be forced to support or take part in a political system goes against my semi-libertarian values.

Freedom from politics ought to be a human right

I'm in Australia. Voting is mandatory here, and that's the reason I believe it doesn't work here. There's a monetary fine for not voting. I'm not sure how much though.

To quote Men in Black; "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."

By making the whole of the populace vote it pretty much means that whoever has the most ads or is able to portray themselves as the most "Aussie" of the pair wins. Or the incumbent wins because people are scared of change. Australians are, by majority, an apathetic culture. "She'll be alright" is the prevailing mindset here. So there tends to be a lack of interest outside of arguing minute semantics they heard on the news, and anything that would directly affect them.

I kid you not, I encountered individuals that were scared of 23-hour days when they announced the introduction of Daylight Savings Time in my state. Yeah. Prevailling opinion was shorter days ahead. Fox News would have the time of their life in this country.

I enjoy the idea of voluntary voting because that way only the people who are interested in an idea will vote. Ideally. But in reality, Bush gets re-elected, so who knows, maybe I'm right and democracy doesn't work.