Analysis of Whether or Not Mandatory Voting Should be Encouraged
Referring to the definition of democracy as per the concepts of active citizenship and equality, this paper gives an analysis of whether or not mandatory voting should be encouraged. A liberty argument suggests that compulsory voting is first of all not democratic and very unethical. This is because; the freedom of choice also entails freedom of not choosing (Lever 3). Democracy remarkably values the freedom of individuals, and the act of subjecting force on citizens to take part in voting is a complete liberty violation. A government which respects democracy respects freedom and should not compel the general public to exercise voting unless they are willing to do so. The concept of voluntariness and stressing on giving citizens freedom is a fastener of the United States democracy. This is because taking part in the election is viewed as a political right and therefore it has to be left for citizens to choose to do it or not. This eventually gets down to offering the option for people to select voluntarily without the interference of the government. Nevertheless, mandatory voting has some positive impacts as it improves participation and increases the awareness of citizens on principle political issues. Some also think that it helps in reducing time wasting campaigns on voter persuasion.
The Significance of Compulsory Voting
There have been a lot of discussions that bring up the issue of compulsory voting lately. In the United Kingdom, notably, many leaders have begun to advocate for mandatory participation in the election. Those who support the compulsory voting often preach its significance in all parts of the society. Compulsory voting has been considered for a lot of reasons, which include traditions and also as a way of stopping the act of purchasing votes from individual citizens. Politics and competition among parties have also contributed to compulsory voting. In Greece and Belgium, selected individuals who belong to the upper class considered this forceful act as a way of avoiding the outsized pressure of the working class people. In the country of Australia, the labor party gave support to compulsory voting to make sure that there was a one hundred percent turnout of their supporters. The coalition, on the other hand, supported it so that they could not have to undergo a lot of struggle when mobilizing voters to take part in the election process. Currently, there are thirty-two countries in the world that practice the mandatory voting. Some of this countries include; Singapore, Brazil, and Greece. Some of them enforce penalty charges on those who refuse to vote. Others go to the extent of freezing the bank accounts of individuals who fail to take part in the process (Ambrus, Greiner and Sastro 35).
Mandatory Voting as a Responsibility
Voting should be mandatory as it is not just a right but also a responsibility. Freedom brings out the point that every human being has a say and again has a mandate of voicing their opinions. If this gets undermined, the system fails to work. If voting is not made compulsory, therefore, an entire class or group of individuals will be compelled not to take part in the election process. Such people won't bother because it is demanding and tiresome to stand in the long voting queues the whole day. Since everyone should exercise their responsibility of voting, it should be made mandatory given that such like individuals substitute laziness with an important activity. People must stand up and choose leaders of their desires. Failure to take part in the process results in poor leaders or lack of satisfaction.
Protecting Voter Access
Compulsory voting assists in protecting voter access. The same way a secret ballot is designated for prevention of interference with cast votes; mandatory voting puts a barrier to interference with vote access. Forcing individuals to the polls for purposes of election mitigate the effects that outside factors may have on the capacity of a citizen to take part in the process. These impacts may include poor weather conditions, transport means or strict employers who never give time to go and vote. Polls must also be held on days that people are free or the election day be declared a public holiday so that every person gets the opportunity to exercise their responsibility of voting. This measure is for disenfranchising the socially disadvantaged individuals. Booths for mobile voting can also be made available near the homes of the elderly and physically disabled individuals. The same should be done in hospitals to accommodate the immobilized people (Wass 503). Those who happen to be away from their respective voting places on the day of election should be able to practice postal voting.
Compulsory Voting and Citizen Training
Mandatory voting compels electorates to train themselves. Voters will potentially get encouraged to do a research on the political positions of candidates in a thorough manner. As a result, this will give a deep understanding of who they are voting for and why. This education, thus, equips the voters with the knowledge of who best suits a given position and such will result in the election of good and able leaders. The training also forces candidates to be more open and practice transparency concerning their position with regards to a lot of controversial and complex factors. For instance, people will have the will to acquire information of even the slightest policy and burning issues that are supposed to be tackled. Voters who are more informed will take a step to oppose unnecessary government acts like poor budgets. This brings the attention that such systems are capable of producing good political decisions that do not contradict, fairly upon the converse.
Drawbacks of Compulsory Voting
On the contrary, compulsory voting does not necessarily give the assurance of capable and better government. The fact that people get forced to take part in voting does not change the fact that they never had the intention of doing so. This is because they never experienced the interest of any political party or contesting candidates. Those who are not bothered to vote are capable of choosing anyone without considering their capabilities just because the process is mandatory. Most of the time the citizens who refuse take part in the voting process have the feeling that none of the candidates are worthy of their votes. Voters are capable of taking a keen analysis of the candidates, and if they find out that the candidates do not qualify for the positions they run for, then they decide not to vote, which is a good take. Most candidates are not capable of solving challenges that exist in the status quo, and this is the reason as to why many countries acquire poor leaders. None of these leaders become good policy formulators due to lack of leadership skills. The whole voting process would suffer defeat since it does not reflect its civic nature-based and the choice of voters. It is likely to become of no meaning and wasteful electoral trifle in government establishment.
The Role of Informed Voters
Compulsory voting can never get equated to active citizenship since the act of comparing high turnout of voters, and active citizenship is so barbaric with lots of challenges. The experience from Australia showed that when the turnout of voters was high, invalid ballot incidences was also high (Evans 4). Therefore, mandatory voting only makes participation of uninformed voters formal. It is a way through which such voters take part in the political process that is insignificant. Those who take the lead in opposing mandatory election process suggest that having voters who are not informed to cast their votes is worse than informed voters avoiding the ballot process. A substantive citizenship definition is a level in which they get informed of the society and the methods in which the society contributes to democracy. The contribution of citizens is not supposed to be measured just by voting (Carreras 159). It could be considered safe saying that the political results are worse if the voters are not informed rather than did not will to vote.
Conclusion
The question of the electoral process as an important section of the democratic society is no longer important. The issue is whether an individual can be forced to take part in the voting process or not against their judgments in democratic interest. The discussion has revealed a lot of the importance of compulsory voting and how it has helped many countries as far as voter turnout is concerned. Nevertheless, democracy must not get decreased to election participation level only. However, significant voting may be just a political participation form, and as the study indicates, it is not a very conclusive one. Democratic organs must respect the freedom and rights of citizens including the privilege of voting. Voting gets viewed as a rational option that individuals opt for when it is in their best interests to do so. A democratic government, thus, is a system that must value not only the participation in the election process but also provide avenues for free expression of choice, reasoned judgments, and freedom. Therefore, mandatory voting is very wrong.
Works Cited
Ambrus, Attila, Ben Greiner, and Anne Sastro. "The case for nil votes: Voter behavior under asymmetric information in compulsory and voluntary voting systems." Journal of Public Economics 154 (2017): 34-48.
Carreras, Miguel. "Compulsory voting and political engagement (beyond the ballot box): A multilevel analysis." Electoral Studies 43 (2016): 158-168.
Evans, Tim. "Compulsory voting in Australia." Australian Electoral Commission Report (2006).
Lever, Annabelle. "Liberalism, Democracy and the Ethics of Voting." Politics 29.3 (2009): 223-227.
Wass, Hanna, et al. "Voting while ailing? The effect of voter facilitation instruments on health-related differences in turnout." Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 27.4 (2017): 503-522.
