I'm having a discussion with my brother...should the U.S. have a compulsory voting system...

[SaveElmer]

As they do in Australia...

In other words, should people be forced to appear at the polls and cast a vote

[wtmusic]

1. No, they should be able to refuse and pay a hefty fine. nt

[SaveElmer]

3. So people should be fined for not voting?

That is what happens in Australia...a $15 fine for not voting

[wtmusic]

4. Yep. nt

[MADem]

20. That's how it is in Australia. You vote, or you have a doctors' note or other excuse, or you pay.

[JeffR]

2. America already has too many stupid, ignorant voters

Hence the large numbers of votes GOP candidates already get.

[SaveElmer]

5. Yeah I agree...

If people aren't interested now, why would they be interested if they were forced to vote...

[suston96]

22. Voting is a duty.....

....of citizenship.

Citizenship is a choice - yes, even for the native-born. You choose to remain a citizen? Then vote.

How can any of that violate the Constitution or anyone's rights?

[SaveElmer]

24. You would be forcing someone to express an opinion...

They might not want to express...

Freedom of speech also protects the right not to speak...

[suston96]

35. No opinion needed.......

...you don't have to express anything.

Leave it blank or write in your dog's name. There is no excuse to shirk your duty as a citizen.

[SaveElmer]

40. Voting is a right...not a duty...

As defined in the constitution...

The right not to avail yourself of a right has always been protected...

And for many, not voting is an act of concious protest...hence a form of speech

[suston96]

45. So protest....

....go vote and cast a blank ballot.

The right to be stupid does not exist. Not voting is a stupid act of laziness and indifference that is harmful to the nation.

[SaveElmer]

46. So you believe the government should be able to define...

The paramters of free speech...

Some forms of free speech are protected and some not?

And yes, there is a right to be stupid...

[suston96]

47. I believe.....

...that WE THE PEOPLE are the government.

We make our laws according to our Constitutions.

If we have a corrupted election system, and that includes lazy citizens not showing up to vote, then the nation is corrupted.

We complained of stolen votes, citizens denied the exercise of their voting rights, and there are people here arguing to protect the right of a stupid person who is too lazy to go to the polling place and perform the most important, the most precious duty of a citizen.

That is what I believe. You asked.

[Shrek]

61. Cast a blank ballot?

How is that materially different from declining to vote?

One is no more lazy or harmful than the other.

[suston96]

66. Cast a blank ballot.....?

We are voluntary members of society. It is our duty to assist in the functioning of that society. The principal way to assist is in the election of the leaders of our society.

If enough people believe they don't have to, and do not vote, those elected may not represent the society in its every component.

The biggest complainers about government (government - the people we elect to represent us) are those who never or only rarely vote.

And the worst ones are those who are stupid enough to believe that they are exercising some kind of right where they do not have to do their share in sustaining the very society that protects them.

[noamnety]

52. Oh brother.

Have you ever been a single parent with a sick child and a broken car? I have.

Not everyone has the luxury of being able to waltz out to stand in line for an hour (6 hours in some cases) to turn in their dog's name on a ballot they don't care about.

Not everyone can even manage to get home from their commute, pick up their child from daycare, and get them something to eat and get to the polls before they close. Some of us working people put in 8 or 9 hours of work sometimes 12 days in a row with no days off, and commute three hours on top of it, and still need to pick up our kids, feed them and ourselves, and do something more meaningful for them than haul them off to stand on line while they cry cause they are tired and don't feel like waiting in a crowd for hours.

I'm not living that way now, but I did for a long time, and the last thing we need is folks living the relatively easy life lecturing us on how we are bad people because we aren't doing enough. x(

Some people are too sick to make it to the polls, and they don't all have the money or the means to go to a doctor's office just to prove they were throwing up or running a fever to appease some beancounter. I couldn't have gotten a doctor's note if I'd been sick on election day - I didn't have insurance back in those days, and the community clinic was only open when I was at work. And I didn't get any time off from work as a "temporary" employee who was in that position full time for a full year, and working weekends in the reserves.

Other than making the working poors' lives even more miserable than it already is, or making some elderly person with arthritis and no transportation put themselves through pain and additional cost just to prove you were able to bully them into doing what you wanted, what could possibly be the point of forcing someone to go to the polls if all they are going to do is turn in a blank ballot?

[suston96]

65. Excuses......

Yeah, I have heard them all.

There are so many ways to vote now where you do not even have to leave your home. Absentee ballots have been around forever. And now there is early voting in virtually every location.

Study the history of voting. See all the women who could not vote because this great land of the free and home of the brave would not let them simply because they were females. Single mother? Yeah, ask your great grandmother....oh, she may not be around. Well, Google it and look it up. See what all those great-grandmothers had to do to be "allowed" by our great and wonderful country to cast a ballot.

The freed slaves and their descendants until just recently, protected and supported by many changes to our beloved Constitution and many voting rights laws - so that they can go stand in the fucking rain and snow for hours so that they can participate in their self-governance.

You see, it's not just about the right to cast a ballot. It's about the right of every human being who lives in a society to participate in his/her self-governance.

When people do not vote, they leave that governance up to others. Pretty soon those that really want to govern, are those who want that power for the very reasons we have fought wars and sacrificed lives to avoid.

Make up all the excuses you want. There isn't one that stands in the face of the history of those who struggled so that you can ignore your duty to vote and stay home and play with your remote control.

Did I say remote control? Yeah, they are devising methods to vote on line from your home so that you can avoid getting wet or cold.

[noamnety]

70. Absentee ballots aren't an option for everyone.

These are the reasons I can get an absentee ballot:

I expect to be absent from the community in which I am registered for the entire time the polls are open on election day.

I am physically unable to attend the polls without the assistance of another.

I cannot attend the polls because of the tenets of my religion.

I have been appointed an election precinct inspector in a precinct other than the precinct where I reside.

I am 60 years of age or older.

I cannot attend the polls because I am confined to jail awaiting arraignment or trial
---------------------------
There is nothing on there about having a fever of 102 and and throwing up.

There is nothing on there about my boss sending me on a business trip with little or no notice during election week (has happened to me, too late to get an absentee ballot)

There is nothing on there about not having state residency anyway (has happened to me, couldn't qualify for state residency anywhere. It's loads of fun to try to get a divorce in that situation.)

There is nothing in there about having a child with a fever and nobody to watch them, in the rain or snow.

I don't know what remote control you are talking about - I guess you're back on the stereotypes of poor people just being stupid, spoiled and lazy. I barely had money for food, had no money for health care, didn't have a car that worked ... I have no clue why you think I would have had a television in those circumstances.

Enjoy your stay up in your ivory tower. :)

[suston96]

71. Still no excuse......

Voting rules and their wardens in any election will assist anyone that needs to cast a ballot.

Some of you have no clue what people have gone through to secure your right to participate in your own self-governance.

Pass on YOUR share of self-governance to others if you want, but don't start whining with "what happened to my right to vote" when suddenly it isn't there anymore.

I was a hard working voting rights activist for many years, and all this talk about "I gots a right not to vote" disgusts me.

[noamnety]

72. They assist people who have residency in their state,

who can get to the polls, who aren't puking their guts out and unable to get out of bed, and last I checked, they didn't stay home with my sick kids, or call my boss and explain why I can't go on that business trip.

But yes, you are probably right. I am probably just too freaking stupid to have any clue about the history of voting rights.

I bet if I only just knew that people had to fight for the right to vote, my kids wouldn't even get sick - I'm pretty sure that strep throat is actually caused by faulty historical knowledge. I bet if I just weren't so stupid, I would have magically had state residency and health care. That really is the problem with us lazy dumbasses. We don't really have any actual issues at all being anywhere, at anytime, that the government mandates.

We're all just too busy watching soap operas to vote. Damn, I can't believe you figured us out.

You should include all that in your voting activist rap - "I'm here because it's come to my attention you are very stupid and lazy."

[suston96]

73. Keep trying....

I am sorry that your life is so miserable but there are many people who have to overcome personal disabilities and weakness and who still manage to honor their duty to cast a ballot. I am sure that even in the Australian system you would be exempt. But there are various methods to secure a ballot, fill it and return it.

I have never had to bully anyone into voting. The people I have talked to always see the error of their ways and that's when I loosen the tether around their necks as they agree to never miss a vote, and magically, the color returns to their faces.

But I will always insist that this "I don't have to vote if I don't feel like it" is a bunch of crap.

[noamnety]

75. "the errors of their ways"

"loosen the tether around their necks"

Wow. You must be awesome.

[Cosmocat]

76. Yeah ...

Fact is, a GOOD election has about a THIRD of the people eligiable to vote actually voting ...

A THIRD ...

As noted, an absentee ballot is available to the overwhelming majority of those who have REAL reasons that make it hard to not get out and vote ... The OVERWHELMING majority of those who don't vote are MORE than able bodied ...

[bluestateguy]

6. I have always supported this

Australia is not what anyone could call a tinhorn dictatorship. Their law is non-controversial and non-voters are simply fined, not hauled off to prison.

But we would have to phase it in gradually in the US. The first thing we should do is make election day a national holiday.

[SaveElmer]

10. Looks to me like it would be a violation of the first amendment...nt

[MadBadger]

17. Simply fined...for not voting?

Damn right that violates the Bill of Rights.

[noamnety]

56. That's just brilliant.

So the people who are too sick or can't afford to take time off work to get to the polls can pay an additional fine they can't afford.

To make it extra insulting, we could make it as easy as possible for rich people to vote by giving them enough machines to ensure their lines are only 10 minutes long. And we could make it extra hard for the poor by withholding machines so they have to chose between getting fined by the state or losing their job for showing up late to work.

We're halfway there already with the unequal voting conditions, we may as well go that extra step and start fining poor people for not being able to handle the 6 hour wait they're required to put up with. That'd be the icing on the cake we let them eat.

[bluestateguy]

57. Did you read anything I wrote?

Make election day a national holiday, so nobody has to lose wages from work.

That would spread out the voting throughout the day, reducing the lines.

[noamnety]

60. People are still sick on national holidays.

People still have sick families to attend to. They still have multiple small children and broken cars.

On a national holiday, stores are still open, and clerks still have to work, people still need to gas up their cars.

You are clearly in a position where you can't recognize how it could possibly be a hardship for someone to get to the polls. And clearly of you were sick, you don't feel like it'd be a hardship to prove it somehow.

Consider yourself lucky. Recognize that your reality is not everyone's reality.

[bluestateguy]

62. And the dog ate my homework

We have two groups of people in this country: doers and excuse-makers.

[noamnety]

64. Yes, I saw where people were called "stupid and lazy".

I'm quite well aware that's the view some privileged people have of the folks who are honestly struggling just to survive each day. Anyone who's ever had to use food stamps or WIC coupons learns that lesson early on.

[MonkeyFunk]

68. You think

nobody works on national holidays?

[AlCzervik]

7. you want idiots to vote? I'd rather more informed voters go to the polls

even if that means fewer numbers.

[SaveElmer]

8. Yeah I agree with that as well...nt

[Smarmie Doofus]

9. No. I favor making it *more* diffcult to vote.

I don't want people voting on the basis of which candidate is a better dresser, of a particular ethnicity, has an "honest face", or some other such inane reason.

And I don't want their vote counting as much as mine.


Making it harder to vote should weed out at least some of the simpletons.

[varelse]

11. I'd be happy if the right to vote would just be given back to us

Plenty of people who voluntarily voted have had that taken away, either by outright fraud or by more insiduous means - intimidation, voter "caging", faulty equipment, or regulations that target certain voter populations for disenfranchisement.

Oh, yeah, and grassroots movements to "get out the vote" being unfairly (illegally?) targeted by our US Department of Justice on "voter fraud" charges...

I see no value in forcing people to vote when we still have absolutely no guarantee that those votes would count. I believe that if we were to restore confidence in the election process by implementing real election reforms - and we wouldn't need to make voting mandatory.

[MonkeyFunk]

12. No

a free society shouldn't compel voting, any more than any other behavior.

Not voting can be a political statement, too.

[SaveElmer]

15. My exact point...looks like a 1st amendment violation...

To me anyway

[MonkeyFunk]

27. However, I see nothing wrong with rewarding voters...

say, a small tax credit?

[SaveElmer]

29. Smacks of bribery to me...

I do favor making it easier to vote...same day registartion, election day as a holiday etc...

[MonkeyFunk]

30. I agree with all that

and elections should occur over an entire weekend.

But I see nothing wrong with using "bribes" to encourage participation. A small amount - maybe a $25 tax credit.

[mzmolly]

13. Heck no.

:hi:

[pansypoo53219]

14. well,

i think what we need is an INFORMED electorate. some non-partisan FACT sheet that goes to each house. or some hotline you can call up. a truth squad but not teevee.

[suston96]

16. Yes...

....works great in Australia and other places.

They have a fine, about $50.00. I talked to some Aussies. They understand and compulsory voting is not a problem.

Oh, and 98% turnout too.

[MadBadger]

18. What would the Bill of Rights have to say about that?

[SaveElmer]

19. How would you get around the constitutional issues...

WOuldn't you be forcing people to express an opinion they may not want to express?

[KittyWampus]

25. you allow for write in candidate. Problem solved.

[SaveElmer]

26. How does that solve the problem...

FOr many people not voting is a political statement

[KittyWampus]

34. With Rights come Responsibilities. If someone wants to make a statement

they can write in "mickeymouse".

[SaveElmer]

36. The right not to avail yourself of a right...

Has always been protected...

[Zynx]

55. Since the expression is not public and not recorded, I don't see a constitutional

issue here. It would be one thing if you were forced to stand up in the middle of the street in front of a few thousand people and state your beliefs.

[The2ndWheel]

21. Nothing worth doing should be forced

[KittyWampus]

28. your answer is great for those who like to shirk responsibilities. Along with Rights

come Obligations.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

23. It would result in a permanent center-left government, but I'm still against it

[The Magistrate]

31. I Would Support This, Sir

It would knock out a primary element of our political life, namely attempts to suppress turn-out, that is pernicious and foul. This aim is the root of most negative campaigning and attack ads, and the cumulative assault of these over the years jibes nicely with declining turn-out percentages, as it leads many people to conclude anyone running is a rascal by definition. A measure like this would make it a much better course to campaign on one's own positives. Such a measure would certainly ensure the electorate was indeed the whole of the people: as things stand now, the voting public greatly over-represents the prosperous and stable, which distorts results on many questions.

[SaveElmer]

32. Don't you think it would be unconstitutional?

1. You would be forcing people to express an opinion they may not want to express...

2. For many, not voting is a form of expression...their commentary on the corrupt political system.

3. SOme religious groups forbid members to participate in voting...certain extrememly conservative protestan denominations...and many monks in cloister cannot vote...

Seems to me it would be restricting rights guaranteed by the first amendment

[The Magistrate]

37. It Does Not Seem To Be So, Sir, On The Face Of It

'Conscientious objectors' might be excused, certainly. As for the rest, nothing says you cannot write in "Mighty Mouse" or 'none of the above' or spoil the ballot in some other manner if that is your wish.

The real question is, is the widest participation of the people in the political process desired, or not? Restricting participation will always work to the benefit of some faction or other. Australia, where such a system is in place, hardly groans under an iron heel of suppressed rights....

[SaveElmer]

39. While I agree Australia is certainly not oppressive..

They are certainly used to a different level of personal liberty than we are...I would argue it is more jealously guarded here...

Forcing an opinion out of someone against their will is analogous to forms of forced patriotism...or forced prayer...those too have opt out options but we reject them as unconstitutional...and any form of "conscientous objector" provision would allow the government to define the paramters of that speech...again a 1st amendmnet violation in my opinion


I do agree restrictions on participation ought to be the focus...same day registration, weekedn voting, holiday on election day, free advertising etc...

[The Magistrate]

42. There Remains The Question, Sir

What benefit do you perceive to flow from a system that prizes suppression of turn-out for elections. There is no doubt that the key element in our present political life consists in reducing the degree of participation at the polls to exaggerate the influence of certain elements and factions within the populace. The results are not pleasing, and quite un-democratic.

[SaveElmer]

44. I agree...but coercion is not the answer...

Election and campaign reform are the keys to increasing participation...

[The Magistrate]

53. With All Due Respect, Sir

That is civics class in its most other-worldly form. Neither of those terms actually means anything, absent particulars, and all meaningful forms of either suggested have largely met the same sort of 'First Amendment' argument you are employing here, or proved to do no more in practice than tax the ingenuity of professionals to find new channels for money and lies, and they are always there, since every law, properly regarded, is a book of instruction on how to evade it. Generally 'the answer' is either enticement or coercion, and a peculiarity of those instances where coercion is the answer is that in those instances, nothing else will serve the turn, or serve it nearly so well.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

41. rights cannot be responsibilities

[SaveElmer]

43. Correct...

The right not to exerceise a right has always been protected...

[suston96]

67. Rights cannot be responsibilities....?

Really? What does that mean? A right carries with it the responsibility of its protection and free exercise. That is the responsibility of every individual who joins a society.

Societies are formed by people for one major reason - the mutual protection of rights and their exercise, which people by themselves cannot fully protect.

Google Thomas Paine. He wrote all about rights and societies. So did many others.

[EffieBlack]

33. Absolutely not

[Nutmegger]

38. Absolutely!

However, I do concede that there may be Constitutional issues with that.

In the meantime, we should make election day a national holiday.

Voter turnout in this country is disgusting, especially during off-year elections.

[uppityperson]

48. Yes. Voting is a duty. People also need to know they need not vote for everything though.

But they need to get out and vote for something.

[Lucinda]

49. Nope.

[Freddie Stubbs]

50. Do you want people who care nothing about voting to have a greater say in government?

:shrug:

[awoke_in_2003]

51. I agree, with many here, that you should not be forced

to vote. I do believe, however, that election day should be a national holiday, so that all have a chance to vote. Why the hell not? After all, Christmas is a national holiday, and being an athiest I have no problem taking that day off. I can celebrate or not, my choice.

[LiberalFighter]

54. If you force them to vote and they would most likely not bother check out the candidates

and then if they did cast a vote just flip a coin or eeny meeny miney moe.

Is that what we want?

[JVS]

58. No. People should not be forced to participate in a process that they don't have any faith in

[CK_John]

59. This of course is a state issue and can be implemented right now if you can find a

state to try it and does not violate the state constitution. We are a republic of 50 states with rights and obligations, reminder to all those on DU who think the federal government is the being and end of all problems and solutions.

[rucky]

63. We should be free to forefit our freedom.

[Perky]

69. It introduces a very interesting political dynamic

In the american system the parties appeal to the base and fight over the middle. the bases in both camps drive the choice of candidates and the middle is taken along for the ride or opts out altogether.


If they are not allowed to opt ot. Or they opt out with a fine. Politicians would be forced to the middle rather than relying on the base in the primary elections. That means the General election candidates would probably be very similar in a presidential election.


The more interesting thing to me is how it would redefine COngressional politics,which is far more base driven and heavily favors incumbency. My guess is that from a policy standpoint things would be very different if the disaffected masses were required to vote. It might wind up being a way to force policy consenus and inturn diminish the power at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.


Think of it. 60% of the american people want us out of Iraq. If everybody voted COngress would be forced to the middle and would likely scale down the war effort tremendously by consensus. It would probably be veto proof. Senators are protected now from bending to the national will because only the bases vote in large numbers and that winds up being the power of incumbency.

[suston96]

74. I don't recall the court, but.....

...a court did rule that a citizen has the right not to vote if that citizen so wishes.

I don't agree, but that was the court ruling. I am sure it can be researched.

[Throd]

77. Force the stupid and ignorant to vote. Great idea!

[riqster]

78. Hell, no.

I've never missed an election in my adult life, but it can be a burden for some people to cast a ballot.

That's reality. If the government wants 100% participation, they can pass laws to facilitate voting,instead of beating on people who don't.

[noamnety]

79. That's the better solution.

Instead of looking for ways to punish people who run up against barriers to voting, remove the barriers and find out why there is resistance. I'd be happy to do away with Columbus's Day of Genocide and have election day instead, and put an additional day on there as well that falls on a weekend. I'd like to drop the restrictions on absentee ballots, so a person doesn't have to lie to get one "just in case."

I'd like to see free daycare at polling places, and free public transit on the voting holiday, and not just in urban areas. Where I grew up, it was about 10 miles to the nearest poll. If you have a broken car and it's a cow town with no taxi service, you're out of luck, particularly if it's snowing or if you have a few kids. When I was really small, we didn't have a car at all, we had a little red wagon that my mom pulled us kids in when she went to the grocery store, and she packed the groceries into the wagon around us. You can't pull two kids in a wagon 20 miles round trip on icy roads.

On top of that, lots of people aren't going to go through any hardship at all until they get rid of the electronic vote-eating machines. How do you convince a person to stand in line for 6 hours when they know the machine can be programmed to show any vote count the programmers want it to show? That's not democracy; it's a sham, and a lot of people are smart enough to understand that their vote is worthless if it isn't counted. So it's an exercise in futility that gives fake credibility to the illusion that our voting system is fair.