Talk Elections

The US has low rates of turnout in presidential election. While turnout in the 2016 presidential election was likely in the high 50s, many countries have voter turnout in the 80s or 90s without even making voting compulsory. However, the states with compulsory voting usually have higher turnout than the countries that don't. Australia mandates voting and typically has turnout of 95%. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout) Should the US have mandatory voting? If so, should voting be moved to a different day first to make it easier for people to show up, and what should the punishment be for those who do not vote?

No.

Make Election Day a public holiday, or move it to the weekend.

Would not be a problem if we get stricter with election oversight and allow for voters to cast a blank ballot, if they truly feel that they want to abstain in a certain election.

Absolutely not -the furthest I'd go is automatic voter registration, but beyond that I think people should be allowed to decide whether or not they want to vote.  This isn't Australia -we weren't founded as a prison colony.  Freedom is our central value in a way it never was in other Anglo-settler countries. 

No if someone isn't motivated enough to vote it's not the governments resposibility to force them

By the way, Australia didn't have compulsory voting till 1924.

To borrow an idea from George Will -- if government forced me to vote when I don't want to I might turn pretty cynical and purposely vote for the worst candidate(s).

No way. No mandatory voting. Uh-uh.

Interesting info -and notable that that was the one country where it could become law in a way it never could anywhere else in the 'Anglo-Saxon world'.  New Zealand doesn't have mandatory voting, Canada doesn't have it, the UK doesn't have it, and I can't imagine the United States ever having it either.  

It's a very important duty and I've got no problem with mandatory voting. I would move the Elections to Saturday instead of Tuesdays like they usually are.

I'd be in favor of mandatory voting. Making it easier is also important, of course, and a more pressing concern. I think it would be reasonable to have two-day elections with voting on both Saturday and Sunday, e.g., and automatic voter registration based on a combined database of tax returns, driver's licenses, Social Security numbers, draft registration, etc. Mail-in ballots are good, too, but I'm not a fan of all-mail voting due to the confidentiality concerns.

Absolutely.

But there needs to be auto-registraion, NOTA, AND a move to the weekend (Friday if the weekday is so important).

But the moment you try to link up those databases for election purposes you will create a significant security and confidentiality issue. Then there is the deeper issue that people can choose not to exercise their rights. What makes voting different than other basic rights that a citizen would lose the ability to decline that right?

Absolutely, it is essential for a nation's freedom, and for people to do their civic duty, right and responsibility, and greatly improves a nation's democracy and political discourse. Cast an invalid ballot, if you wish to, get out of your fycking bed and vote though.

How would that be different than a poll tax, the kind used in the Jim Crow South, except in reverse.

no, but everyöne should be able to vote

Come on now. If we make election day a holiday, or move it to the weekends, then people will be too busy enjoying their lives to vote

Absolutely not.

Muon 2 was not just making a moral point about the wrongfulness of imposing a poll tax. The U.S. has two laws that we cannot impose any tax on a citizen as a prerequisite for letting them vote. Those two laws are: 1) the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, 2) the Supreme Court's precedent in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 1966. Australia and other countries do not have such a difficult-to-repeal-law that prohibits poll taxes.

Hopefully the rich will see it as a trendy status symbol to not vote.

No. Brazil has mandatory voting, and from what I hear from the news and from actual Brazilians, it dosen't help the political culture one bit. And I highly doubt that the US's political culture is so much superior (especially these days) that mandatory voting will work better here.

Better to change the context of how voting occurs (making voting easier, moving Election Day to a weekend/making it a holiday, automatic voter registration) than to enforce a requirement.

No way.

No.  Absolutely not.  Terrible idea.

Citizens being herded into voting booths simply does not fit in with the land of the free home of the brave concept.

Yea, not what happens.

I think yes but:

1. You can cast blank on any race or even for the entire ballot.
2. Voting lasts an entire week, 7 to 7 each day (for major elections). Taxes increase if necessary to make that possible.
3. You can vote absentee without having to provide an excuse.
4. Penalty for not voting is a modest fine.
5. Not applicable to primaries or minor elections.

Never. If you just make it easier to vote, there will be higher turnout.

The comparison literally makes no sense as the issue with a poll tax was that it put a financial requirement for voter eligibility--this would in no way restrict voting access.

No, we have the right to vote, not requirement to vote.

In my opinion, it is our duty to vote, we can't be forced to. However, if someone shames you for not voting in a presidential election, they're somewhat justified.

No... Horrible idea.

Wow I thought this was a new thread so I saw the post where I quoted someone and almost quoted it again not realizing it was me

This sounds like a bad idea. Forcing people to vote is a violation of their rights.

I think we should mail every voter a ballot – whether they take the time to fill it out and return it is their choice.

No, you just end up forcing people to participate in something they wan't no part in. People should have the right to do as they please - that's what's called freedom.

I wouldn't mind a system where people are forced to turn in a ballot, whether in person or by mail. They don't have to fill it out, but they have to turn it in or get a fine. The idea here would be that most people would just go ahead and fill it out anyway. We might be able to get actual turnout (excluding empty ballots) up to around 75% - 80% that way, which is pretty satisfactory. I don't see a fundamental violation of our rights in that (though it is probably not constitutional), as no one is forced to actually cast a vote.

At the very least, we need to have same day/automatic voter registration, county-wide polling places, closing times at no earlier than 8, two weeks at least of early voting, permanent no-excuse absentee voting and a prohibition of photo ID laws unless proven necessary (there are better ways to prevent in-person fraud than photo IDs, which reduce young/minority turnout). There is no good reason we can't do those things, and the reason we haven't in so many areas is because of pure partisanship and the desire to win above everything else.

Really? You don't see a problem with fining people for not turning in a piece of paper, many of which will be blank anyway? That's borderline coercion IMO. Just because the goal is laudible, doesn't justify the use of force; that's exactly what a fine is.

All I can say is the mandatory voting that we have in Australia forcibly enfranchises the apathetic, a lot of whom will make their decisions as they stroll to the polling both or even as they're actually in the booth. Think about it. Do you really want the disinterested to vote?

I'm still somewhat undecided on the practice even if I don't mind the idea, but it's a moot point anyway, it'll never happen in the US. Given how partisan even the most basic election law changes are, there is no way there would ever be enough support for mandatory voting. If Democrats did try to do that, there would probably be a massive backlash. However, I still stand by this:


These are common sense changes that are pro-voter access but not reckless nor offensive to one's rights, and given how gracious Republicans have been to blanket the country with voting restrictions since Obama was elected, I'm hoping Democrats will ram through any/all of those changes the second it is possible, with or without GOP support.

Obviously no.  First, from a practical standpoint, enforcement would be a nightmare and it's difficult to imagine a greater waste of funding than that.  Second, I'm not sure under what constitutional power any federal law could be enacted.  Elections are largely run at the state and local level.  Maybe at the local level it would be less susceptible to constitutional challenge.

Finally, I find it odd that people, especially on the left, would suggest a penalty or fine.  Particularly when the people most likely to forget to show up, fail to register, can't get off work, etc., are low income and minority demographics.  How unbelievably patronizing.

Voting is a privilege and right. You should want to participate and the government shouldn't force you to do anything against your will. That is not democracy.

Yep your last paragraph is the best argument against mandatory voting

Also, I have another idea. Remove the concept of precincts entirely, and allow people to vote at any polling place in their district. A lot of people on election day might not be in their precinct for various reason, they might be at work, and not able to get back to their own polling place, or they might be off on a trip, in which case allow people to cast an absent vote for their district from outside the district.

Mandatory voting is a horrible idea because A. It violates people's rights and more practically B. Having people who are uninformed and apathetic voting is not helpful to anyone.

I do think it would be reasonable, as some here have suggested, to make Election Day a national holiday. I would actually prefer the opposite though, have less people vote by requiring them to take a civics test or something of that nature to register. That would help make sure that only those who care to learn and understand the importance of elections are deciding the direction our nation takes. That way you get less people voting for candidates they think are "cool" (Obama 2008) and would also thin out some of the folks on the right who just vote for the candidate that is the most "politically incorrect" or whatever.

Universal suffrage is the only way to go.

I wish voters had to pass a test on basic US government, history, and economics to register. Obviously that's not constitutional, but enough of the electorate is already uninformed without mandatory voting.

This is actually an idea on the upswing. California is implementing "vote centers" that are county-wide, same as Colorado. North Carolina allows out-of-precinct voting too (although the GOP legislature tried to get rid of it after seeing that it helped minorities). I'm not sure what Arizona's deal is, but after that 2016 debacle I do think I read something about them trying this on a county-by-county basis.

I think this idea will continue to spread to more states, but it'll probably take a while given how partisan election law has become.

I don't think the kind of test you're referring to is "not constitutional," I think it's illegal per the Voting Rights Act. When the Supreme Court was faced with a literacy test for voters, it unanimously upheld the test (Lassiter v. Northampton County Board of Elections) but years later Congress banned literacy tests for voters when it passed the Voting Rights Act.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_test (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_test)

I don't see a problem with it, no. Ok so it's coercion. You can also get in trouble for not filling out your census form. That's coercion too.


Yes because it will entice many of them to become minimally interested. And it's not just the disinterested that don't vote. When I was 18 I was a huge political junkie, but I didn't vote in my first possible Presidential election because I knew my individual vote did not matter. There are probably a lot of people who know the basic issues and care but don't vote based on a cost benefit analysis of their time. This would get them to vote.


That's why I said it has to be coupled with week long voting and the option to vote absentee without an excuse. I'd favor automatic voter registration too.

And for everyone saying that being required to vote violates your rights, I don't doubt that it's probably unconstitutional at the moment and possibly untenable solely via legislation. But then I think we should change the Constitution to require it. Then it wouldn't be violating your rights anymore, because your rights would be different.

No.

Democracy, the priviledges and honors resulting from it, should not be enforced against people's will, in nearly any case. It's the law of citizens to vote or not to vote.

But in the US I would try to make at least the presidential voting day a non-working day, as there is in Europe.

This, plus keep it non-compulsory.

Polling places should just give everyone who votes a free lollipop. Problem solved!

I agree with keeping it non-compulsory, but move it to Saturday - We do elections just fine on a Saturday, and the polling stations are open from 8-6, so plenty of opportunity to vote.

For states with early voting like IL this already exists. Election day becomes merely the last day to cast a ballot. Moving the day probably wouldn't change anything for us.

No.The land of the free is not the land of vote or else. So are you going to get arrested for not voting?

While I think its ridiculous not to vote, I don't think it should be mandatory.

Are all the polling stations open early though? In my state, the early vote locations cover many precincts. My early vote location is a half hour away, whereas my normal polling location is 5 min away. I was excited when we passed early voting, but when I realized this dynamic, it's actually much more convenient for me to just vote on election day. It would be even more convenient if it wasn't a work day.

Of course I would vote even if I had to do it at 3 AM and an hour away, but for the average voter I think the extra convenience matters a lot. That's why I would like to see voting expanded to multiple days (with all stations opened) and liberal use of absentee voting if desired.

It's not cost effective to have every precinct open for the whole early voting period. In fact, for primaries in IL only select polling places are open on election day and they serve as the polling place  for multiple precincts. The same can be true in general elections, and the local election authority (usually the county clerk) determines where to have open locations based on anticipated turnout. The minimum number of early voting locations for each local authority is established by law.

Sure, but then there's a big difference between an early voting day and election day, and so holding the election on a weekend instead of a weekday could make a big difference.

Personally, I think all/most should be open for many days, even if it's not cost effective. I'm willing to pay extra taxes if it makes it easier for everyone to vote.

No. We'd look WAY too much like a communist authoritarian regime. And the whole idea of it isn't good itself. People in jail over not voting for the lesser of two evils? No.

We don't need low-information voters with barely a high school education being forced to vote in an election for which they know next to nothing. 

According to a study (https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publications/2017-voter-survey/follow-the-leader) released recently (and here's the article (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/03/13/new-poll-finds-increase-in-support-for-democracy-but-weaker-support-among-politically-disengaged-and-conservatives/?utm_term=.4e7879d7a2eb)), support for authoritarian rule is strongest among that demographic. 

So, I'm fine with them not voting. 

Low-information voters sure sounds like a dog whistle.

I can't imagine any demographic that deserves it more.  And besides, they are Trump's base.  They love dog-whistling everybody else. 

Yes, but states should do it individually, like California wants to make voting day, a holiday.

But jail doesn't have to be the penalty. It could be a modest fine.

Also, the requirement doesn't necessarily need to be to check a box so much as turn in a ballot (possibly blank).

Ah yes, just like the communist authoritarian regime of the Democratic People's Republic of Australia.

I say that we should have mandatory voting. It's not that flipping hard to do it

Funnily enough, it's only people like you which hear the dogwhistle. 

I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not, but that’s certainly one theory; the problem is that voters may see their candidates as equally negative, as opposed to equally positive or equally ineffectual.

Remember though that the voting part of the phrase is a bit misleading. It's actually more compulsory attendance, as in you have to go and get your name marked off. What you do with your ballot is completely up to you, you could just go straight from the the area you get your ballots right to the box and put it in, there's really nothing stopping you.

no

If a voter does not show up on election day, what does that mean? Perhaps, she/he supports neither of the candidates on the ballot. To increase turnout just include "against all" option, rather than making voting mandatory.

No, because if someone does not wish to vote they should have the freedom to make that decision. Additionally, it just decreases the quality of the electorate because it significantly increases the amount of apathetic voters, single issue voters, wedge issue voters, etc.

I really don't understand the logic of forcing politically ignorant and apathetic people to vote.

Hell no, people should get to decide that on their own.

The voting system itself it what drives their apathy.

No. Just, no.

Yes. Yes and Yes.

In a mandatory voting system, the total vote count better represents the wants of the public. It's the inevitable end of the idea that more voting is always good voting. It's shown that lower voter turnout can lead to skewed results, usually towards the most passionate, well organized, entrenched, radical, etc. groups. This can be especially true in local elections where voting turnout can be extremely low. So, for the sake of preserving the integrity of elections, which are meant to result in policies that represent & govern the citizens effected, whether they vote or not, mandatory voting should exist.

I take back what I said last year, we absolutely should not have mandatory voting

Well in my view, there shouldn't be any major penalty, just a small fine. (Plus casting a blank ballot is fine, plus voting absentee w/o justification is fine.)

Think of it like jury duty. You can easily get out of serving on a jury by saying you are opposed to trial by jury. But you still have to show up as a civic duty.