Australia is Having its Election Today and Voting is Compulsory.

[Turborama]

Voting in Australia is compulsory. It means that every Australian citizen (18 years or older) is required by law to enroll and vote. If a person does not vote and is unable to provide a "valid and sufficient" reason, a penalty is imposed. Compulsory voting at federal elections was introduced in 1924.

An Australian perspective...

In Australia, we've got it pretty good. Election day here is not marred by violence. Votes and voters are not suppressed. Compulsory attendance at a polling station ensures a 95 per cent voter turnout.

It's hard to understand why more nations aren't following our lead. Compulsory attendance on election day has a number of obvious benefits.

First and foremost, it means that more of us vote. Those of us who are too busy or too lazy cannot simply stay home. Despite our objections and our gripes, we know it's for the best. Forcing us down to the closest primary school is an act of tough love.

Second, compulsory attendance motivates more of us to take an interest in the issues most pertinent to our nation's health.

Third, it means that our political parties attempt to represent the widest possible cross-section of Australians, rather than simply pandering to those most likely to attend an optional vote.

On top of these reasons, there's the added bonus that taxpayers' money doesn't have to be wasted on campaigns urging citizens to attend the polling station.

Full piece: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion-old/for-some-voters-preferences-mean-none-of-the-above/story-e6frfifo-1225905611744

Do you think compulsory voting would be a good idea for American General Elections?

If No or Other, it'd be particularly interesting to hear why.

Of course, it will be interesting to hear any feedback from all Yes voters, too.

Thanks in advance to all participants...

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. It is being discussed among academics

as a way to break the logjam.

For background, the Australian system was in the same logjam early in the last century, with voting rates of 40% or so. If this does sound familiar... after it got passed... that broke and the system started to function.

I'd like to add a few other things, but regardless even though it would be good... the only way I can see this is with an amendment, and these days...

[Turborama]

3. I'd be interested to hear the other things you'd like to add....

If you've got time to share them, that is.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. I heard the story on NPR and I will have to research it further in depth

so I just shared the nugget of the story.

As to the reforms I'd like to see added, proportional representation and a 24 year maximum of service in both the house and senate. Yes we have some folks who are extremely good, but IMO this lack of turn over is not good. California has very strict limits (for the US) and that is destructive in it's own way. But if we had those term limits we should start seeing more ahem turnover.

Oh and another non academic

http://www.slate.com/id/2108832

[Turborama]

7. I think term limits is another really important topic, too

That would make a very interesting poll in and of itself.

Although proportional representation is an excellent concept, could the difficulties of implementing it in America be overcome? There'd have to be a really long educational campaign for the whole country about how it would work.

I can see Bachmann, Beck et al screaming out about "RE-EDUCATION CAMPS!!!1!" etc etc.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. They did it south of the border in less than a year

but they had videos of it at the movie theater and tv.

Then again, Mexico does have a... political culture, we don't.

It could if we wanted, but it would break the power structure and that alone will prevent it.

Darn it... John Stuart Mill was born 70 years TOO LATE!

[The Magistrate]

2. It is A Very Useful Reform, Sir

The worst features of our electoral politics all relate to attempts at 'shaping' the electorate by manipulating who does and does not turn out to vote. Law requiring everyone to vote knocks all value out of these tactics.

[Turborama]

5. Thank you for your feedback

I agree with all you say. That's why our political adversaries did everything they could to destroy ACORN, and sadly succeeded

[PJPhreak]

6. And...

Election Day should be a Federal Holiday,Close the Banks,Wall St.,Schools,Post Office Ect.

Vote early...Then go home and have a "Election Day Party"

See....No excuse Not to vote.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. Move it to Sunday

and make special arrangements for people who could have a valid excuse... see medical, EMS, Fire and police personnel.

Those should be easy. Either have special polls or distribute ballots to them at shift change, if need be. Or in the case of police go to tac alert and half the shift goes to vote, while the other is on stand by. Once they are done, they shift.

Hospital workers would be a little trickier but if need be absentee ballots should work.

[MattBaggins]

35. How about if the excuse is

I don't fucking feel like voting.

Do you hold a gun to that persons head and force them to pull the lever for someone?

[PJPhreak]

48. No obviously you dont...

But if you don't vote wadda complaining about.

I can't count the number of people I know that Complain about Tiahart This and Obama that.

Then they sit on their ass and do nothing about it!

So the next time a Bush or a Reagun gets into office,The next time the Florida "Selects" the next Puke in office,The next time the super wealthy pay even less in taxes while sending jobs overseas,The next time Wall St gets Rich while folks let those here on DU lose their homes, Wadda You Gonna Do?

Republicans Vote.

Democrats Don't

So whats your anwser,How do we get a more than 50-60% voter turnout?

If we had a Clear majority in 2000....

[sabrina 1]

9. I've had mixed feelings about mandatory voting

but this may have persuaded me:

Third, it means that our political parties attempt to represent the widest possible cross-section of Australians, rather than simply pandering to those most likely to attend an optional vote.

And the other point made above regarding making it difficult for certain groups to vote.

[Turborama]

12. Yep

That would take care of all the 'single issue' campaigning/voting crap that goes on.

[drmeow]

10. I think compulsory voting

needs to be supported with certain election day reforms such as:

1) voting day is a holiday or over a weekend or lasts for 2 days or something that ensures that people can get to the polling station without hardship, etc.
2) polling places have to be the same location every election (in 7 years I've voted at 4 or more different polling locations)
3) polling places are neutral (i.e., no churches - there is evidence that ideologically based polling places have an influence on voting patterns)
4) there need to restrict the number of elections that can be held each year - there have been times where I've had 4 or 5 elections in a single year, sometimes a separate election day for a single issue.

and, if we're allowing pipe dreams

5) campaign finance reform ... I'm pretty sure Australia has publicly funded elections.

Edit to add:

I also like proportional representation and reasonable term limits and a long and very strict limit on lobbying by former elected officials

[Turborama]

15. 1 to 4 should be easy enough to implement

5) I don't think we even need to do a poll on DU for that one as it seems so commonsensical, lol. Having said that, though, it would be interesting to do one, just in case there were some valid points/ideas brought up about restrictions that were worth considering.

In Britain they have publicly funded elections and equal TV advertising time.

They put a lot of effort into making elections as (literally) fair and balanced as they can.

[drmeow]

23. Theoretically easy enough to implement

but they would make it much harder to disenfranchise voters so the resistance from the powers-that-be would be fierce.

[sabrina 1]

17. Those are very good suggestions.

One more I would add. There should be a limit on the length of campaigns. It is utterly ridiculous to have a two or more year campaign for the presidency imo. I think some countries restrict campaigns to six months. Maybe one year, but no longer.

[Turborama]

19. You might be surprised to hear that in Britain their election campaign is only 1 month long

It's like a 'speed dating' election compared to American election campaigns.

[drmeow]

22. Amen - that's a good one n/t

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

40. In Brazil, all of 1-4 are true. Things run smoothly. -nt

[bbgrunt]

13. one important drawback of compulsory voting must

be noted: it forces the uninformed and uninterested in making a choice they may know nothing about. In Australia they must randomize the names on the ballot otherwise people will just vote for the party listed first--it is called the "donkey vote".

Also in Australia they vote for parties, not individuals, and use a preference ranking system which is much more conducive to third, fourth parties. I would definitely support this part of their system.

Finally, I think that requiring everyone to vote will not necessarily help with the problems of black box voting and vote counting, caging, last minute changing of voting locations, voter purges, and other election fraud shenanigans that can be so important in actually getting a poll of voter preferences.

[bluestateguy]

14. I have supported this idea for a long time

with election day as a national holiday, no exceptions, save for the hospitals, police and ER.

[Rhiannon12866]

16. K&R.Interesting concept and one that I'll have to think about.

Of course, I think it's a good idea, but my mind immediately goes to the lack of knowledge of most Americans, of the issues and even of the candidates. And even those who think that they're up to speed on things can totally misunderstand. Viewers of Fixed News come to mind. But perhaps compulsory voting changes all that. Maybe people pay more attention, read more, discuss things more. Maybe the education that they receive is different, or they respond to it differently. Sounds like a good idea, but a revolutionary one for us... :)

And I completely agree with those who think that election day should be a national holiday, so that more people would make it to the polls. This is definitely an idea whose time has come and I hope that it happens... It could make a huge difference and solve a host of problems, like Ohio 2004. :(

[LoZoccolo]

18. No way. I respect people who know that they do not know.

I couldn't imagine what kind of idiotic things candidates would do to get the "I wouldn't be voting if they didn't make me" vote. It would be worse than the special election for governor of California to replace Grey Davis.

[sabrina 1]

27. That's simple,

Just tell them 'if you vote for me since you have to vote for someone anyhow this time, I will make it my business to get this law overturned so you will never, ever have to vote again'. Then, once elected, simply say 'my thinking has evolved on this issue'.

And no one would be surprised, since campaign promises are, what is it we are told about that? Oh yes, just say 'you weren't listening, that's not what he actually said, and anyhow, there would be no point in pushing it because the votes are not there and you are politically naive if you think he could do that without a super, super majority'.

Campaign promises. Easy to make, and just as easy to break.

Where do I apply for a job as a consultant?

[LLStarks]

20. Make Election Day a federal holiday, but don't make voting compulsory. nt

[Violet_Crumble]

21. If I get forced to vote then so should everyone else!

Actually, I've never grumbled about having to vote. It makes sense to me coz if voting is optional then isn't it going to favour those who are passionate to the point of being zealoted (and that's generally conservatives)? Most other people won't be so driven to vote and if it's raining or they're busy, they won't bother voting...

There's no need for public holidays in the US if voting was mandatory. Here, elections are on Saturdays and it's really easy to do an absentee vote. I'm too lazy to go and stand in line on a weekend, so I voted two days ago. I got asked if I was going away on Saturday, so I just said yes and they let me vote...

There's many other drawbacks to the US system that I can see, though, and I think the entire system needs a massive overhaul...

[Turborama]

24. Thank you for your 1st hand input, Violet

It's really interesting to hear an Aussie's take on it.

I laughed at the way you described this.

"I'm too lazy to go and stand in line on a weekend, so I voted two days ago. I got asked if I was going away on Saturday, so I just said yes and they let me vote..."

So sweet and easy!

[Violet_Crumble]

26. No worries, Turbo...

I was a bit surprised that I was even asked if I was going away. A bunch of my friends voted during last week and none of them got asked :)

[NYC Liberal]

25. I am completely against it. It does nothing but boost turnout numbers,

which is meaningless when you have uninformed voters making uninformed choices.

First and foremost, it means that more of us vote. Those of us who are too busy or too lazy cannot simply stay home. Despite our objections and our gripes, we know it's for the best. Forcing us down to the closest primary school is an act of tough love.

Right, so people show up because they have to. Instead of having the people who are most motivated showing up at the polls, you have a ton of people who show up, pull the lever for any candidate just to fulfill the legal requirement.

Second, compulsory attendance motivates more of us to take an interest in the issues most pertinent to our nation's health.

That's pretty naive. Compulsory voting does not " more of us to take an interest in the issues most pertinent to our nation's health," it motivates people to show up and pull the lever so they don't get slapped with a fine or whatever the punishment is for non-voting. Voluntary voting, on the other hand, means that only the people who are most motivated to show up and wait in line to vote, will vote. Voluntary voters will have reasons for voting beyond "I have to or I'll get a big fine." Even if you think they're wrong. Even if you think they're making a bad choice in who to vote for.

Third, it means that our political parties attempt to represent the widest possible cross-section of Australians, rather than simply pandering to those most likely to attend an optional vote.

Politicians here in the US have to encourage people to vote. The threat of staying home means that politicians here have to both offer a very compelling reason to vote, AND a reason to vote FOR THEM. Politicians in a compulsory voting system face no threat of voters staying home. Thus they merely have to be "less evil" than their opponent(s). The power of people to not vote for ANYONE is a very important one.

[Turborama]

28. When he says...

"Second, compulsory attendance motivates more of us to take an interest in the issues most pertinent to our nation's health."

It sounds like he's talking about how it affects the political climate in his country. I don't live in Australia and know very little about their political climate, so I'm prepared to take his word for it unless someone can prove him wrong without just insulting his take on how things work in Australia.

[NYC Liberal]

41. Oh yeah, I know. I was just saying that I'm skeptical that

it would happen that way here.

[Violet_Crumble]

29. A few points...

It does nothing but boost turnout numbers, which is meaningless when you have uninformed voters making uninformed choices.

Who gets to decide who is and isn't uninformed and making uninformed choices? From what I've seen, conservative voters in the US who don't have to vote but do are the furthest thing from informed people making informed choices that I've seen. I'm sure there's plenty of uninformed people who believe they're very informed, so who gets to decide if they are or not? I'm pretty sure that uninformed voters aren't confined to Australia...

Right, so people show up because they have to. Instead of having the people who are most motivated showing up at the polls, you have a ton of people who show up, pull the lever for any candidate just to fulfill the legal requirement.

Firstly, we don't pull levers here. I got given two ballot papers (one for the house of reps and one for the senate) and a pencil and went into a booth and primitively etched out numbers. I also suspect that having the most motivated folk showing up to vote would give an advantage to conservative types here coz it'd be the zealoted global warming deniers, anti-abortionists, anti-union, single issue bores who'd turn up and vote. At least the way we do it no-one can opt out of being part of our electoral process...

Compulsory voting does not " more of us to take an interest in the issues most pertinent to our nation's health," it motivates people to show up and pull the lever so they don't get slapped with a fine or whatever the punishment is for non-voting. Voluntary voters will have reasons for voting beyond "I have to or I'll get a big fine." Even if you think they're wrong. Even if you think they're making a bad choice in who to vote for.

If people were just turing up and randomly voting because they have to, then the election results from 2007 and tonight wouldn't be the way they are. In 2007 there was a massive voter backlash against the Howard govt and a lot of it had to do with WorkChoices. It was hurting most working folk badly and the PM ended up losing his seat back then. Tonight the result is showing a swing away from the Labor party in Queensland where it looks like the overthrow of Kevin Rudd (he's from Queendland) has hurt the ALP. I had to vote or I could get fined, and I'm in a very safe Labor electorate so it's not like my vote makes any difference to anything, but I worked out that if I voted Green in the Senate I could help to get rid of the sole Liberal senator we have. Many people I know here who are also forced to vote took the same approach as I did. So I think it's wrong to paint us as people who don't think about how we vote just because voting is mandatory here...

Politicians here in the US have to encourage people to vote. The threat of staying home means that politicians here have to both offer a very compelling reason to vote, AND a reason to vote FOR THEM. Politicians in a compulsory voting system face no threat of voters staying home. Thus they merely have to be "less evil" than their opponent(s). The power of people to not vote for ANYONE is a very important one.

Isn't the most compelling reason to vote because we get to participate in how our countries are run and actually have a choice? That's something people in some other countries have never had experience of and I bet they wouldn't need some politician to coax them to participate in the democratic process. Politicians here face the threat of being kicked out of their seats. To me, staying home to show disapproval of a politician seems like people are just taking the easy way out and opting out of things totally. If both major party candidates were equally unappealing to me, then my vote would go to the Greens, but I'd definately not do a donkey vote or anything like that...

[Binka]

31. Don't Waste Your Time Darlin' n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

33. I just wasted my time watching several depressing hrs of election coverage...

It's been that sort of night for me...

[NYC Liberal]

42. Thoughts...

Who gets to decide who is and isn't uninformed and making uninformed choices? From what I've seen, conservative voters in the US who don't have to vote but do are the furthest thing from informed people making informed choices that I've seen. I'm sure there's plenty of uninformed people who believe they're very informed, so who gets to decide if they are or not? I'm pretty sure that uninformed voters aren't confined to Australia...

Well, as you said: Who gets to decide who is and isn't uninformed and making uninformed choices? There is a difference between someone making a choice that you disagree with, for reasons that you disagree with, and someone being uninformed. Someone voting for a conservative Republican because they support their anti-choice stance is not (necessarily) uninformed, but has views with which you (presumably) and I disagree and is voting for the person who they think best matches those views.

In a voluntary voting system, everyone who votes has some reason for doing so. Yes of course there are uninformed voters in any system, but in a voluntary system there isn't a large swath of voters that is merely voting because they are legally required to.

Firstly, we don't pull levers here. I got given two ballot papers (one for the house of reps and one for the senate) and a pencil and went into a booth and primitively etched out numbers. I also suspect that having the most motivated folk showing up to vote would give an advantage to conservative types here coz it'd be the zealoted global warming deniers, anti-abortionists, anti-union, single issue bores who'd turn up and vote. At least the way we do it no-one can opt out of being part of our electoral process...

It is best to have voters who choose to vote because every person who shows up to vote has to care enough to walk or drive to the polling station, wait in line, and vote. Their motivation can be something you disagree with. But again, do you really want a bunch of people voting merely because they HAVE to? You'll get a lot of people who just don't care and others who are pissed that they don't have the right to sit it out and will vote for Mickey Mouse or someone.

f people were just turing up and randomly voting because they have to, then the election results from 2007 and tonight wouldn't be the way they are. In 2007 there was a massive voter backlash against the Howard govt and a lot of it had to do with WorkChoices. It was hurting most working folk badly and the PM ended up losing his seat back then. Tonight the result is showing a swing away from the Labor party in Queensland where it looks like the overthrow of Kevin Rudd (he's from Queendland) has hurt the ALP. I had to vote or I could get fined, and I'm in a very safe Labor electorate so it's not like my vote makes any difference to anything, but I worked out that if I voted Green in the Senate I could help to get rid of the sole Liberal senator we have. Many people I know here who are also forced to vote took the same approach as I did. So I think it's wrong to paint us as people who don't think about how we vote just because voting is mandatory here...

I definitely don't think EVERYONE in a compulsory voting system just votes because they have to. Certainly not. I'd bet that most people are at least somewhat informed, even if they're single-issue voters or vote for someone you don't like. The problem - I think - is when you take all those voters and add to them the bloc of voters who vote because they have to. In a voluntary voting system, you don't have those people.

sn't the most compelling reason to vote because we get to participate in how our countries are run and actually have a choice? That's something people in some other countries have never had experience of and I bet they wouldn't need some politician to coax them to participate in the democratic process. Politicians here face the threat of being kicked out of their seats. To me, staying home to show disapproval of a politician seems like people are just taking the easy way out and opting out of things totally. If both major party candidates were equally unappealing to me, then my vote would go to the Greens, but I'd definately not do a donkey vote or anything like that...

The most compelling reason to vote is having a choice between or among diverse candidates who have different ideologies, different views, different positions. Many people do not just want to vote for a "lesser of two evils" candidate, and there is not always a third or fourth candidate running. So the threat of staying home and not voting becomes just as powerful as voting for one candidate or the other. Candidates are compelled to differentiate themselves from each other, which is a good thing.

I definitely think there are merits to compulsory voting. I think it could POTENTIALLY, in theory, cause more people to take an interest in issues. I'm skeptical of that happening (at least here). Most of my objections to the author quoted in the OP are based on what I think will happen in reality, rather than what may happen in theory.

But anyway, it's good to get different perspectives on it :hi:

[TheKentuckian]

50. Politicians don't care if people stay home. Its already lesser of two evils.

Not to mention the most ignorant Faux Newz fuckers on Earth are the ones fired up and ready to go on election day as is.

[RagAss]

30. All I have to do is pay my taxes and die.

[sabrina 1]

47. And make sure to do it 'soon' before

becoming eligible for SS or in need healthcare.

There, that just had to fix that. :hi:

[HEyHEY]

32. It's simple, manditory voting and a "None of the above" option

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

38. In Brazil, anyone can nullify their vote. All you have to do is not type any numbers

and press "Confirm". That, or typing a nonexistent candidate number.

[MattBaggins]

34. I get out to vote in elections myself but

If I chose to stay in bed all day that is my business.

Compulsory is bullshit and violates the Democratic process.

[ihavenobias]

36. # 8, very interesting topic. n/t

[Iggo]

37. Abso-fuckin-lutely.

Register for The Draft. Compulsory.

Jury Duty. Compulsory.

Vote. Compulsory. (And waaaaaay easier than jury duty.)

[Iggo]

45. Oops.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

39. Can't be done in the US unless election day is NOT a workday.

And if having a day off is out of the question, hold them in Sundays.

[Festivito]

43. Tax them higher if they want to pay US to run it all for them.

Half of what they made minus their taxes at play. They get to keep the percentage of votes they attended over the votes offered.

That's not compulsory, just incentivised.

[davepc]

44. Just make election day a Federal Holliday

[Iggo]

46. Kick.

[Turborama]

49. Thanks!

And thanks to everyone who's been taking part.