The Arguments For Compulsory Voting Politics Essay

Utilising the definition of democracy as tied to the concepts of liberty, equality, legitimacy, and active citizenship, this paper analyzes whether compulsory voting is in line with the essential maxims of democracy.

The argument for freedom would suggest that compulsory voting is especially undemocratic because the freedom of choice must fundamentally include the freedom to not select (Lever 2009, 3). Because democracy extremely values specific freedom, as de Tocqueville implies, the work of forcing people to vote with matching sanction for non-compliance is clearly a violation of freedom. As the libertarian argument will not discount the benefits of compulsory voting by itself, such as greater turnout prices (Lijphart, 1997, 10), these perceived benefits cannot justify federal government encroachment on specific liberties. A government that values democracy values specific freedom and cannot compel its citizens to vote if it is perhaps not in the latter’s most readily useful interest to do this. The concept of voluntariness and also the emphasis on individual freedom is a staple of American democracy (de Tocqueville 2003). Because voting is a political right, it should be left towards individual to decide on to exercise or perhaps not to work out. It sooner or later comes down to providing that selection for the individual to voluntarily choose, clear of federal government disturbance.

From the standpoint of civil liberties, the right not to vote is a type of message that's protected in very first Amendment (Matsler 2003, 960). This has an accompanying right not to talk as well. Remaining silent when doing so is for your most readily useful interest is a statement on it's own. Likewise, the choice never to vote is a form of governmental statement which enshrined in very first Amendment and requires security. Forcing someone to vote would be likened towards state violating that individual’s right to the First Amendment. As the federal government is compelling the given individual to be at the mercy of numerous alternatives they face on polling place, the federal government are silencing “the more informative governmental statement” they want to make by staying away from the polls and choosing not to engage (Evler 2009, 32). Compulsory voting then, not merely violates an important civil liberty (the proper to free speech and freedom of expression), their state also endangers its very own representativeness as it fails to respect the liberties of electors to select not to participate.

From philosophical standpoint, the issue of whether voting must be compelled among people is despite the aims of liberty, which based on Mill (1999, 34) prioritizes self-interest first, and self-government, 2nd. Political participation goes in conjunction with these axioms. 1st relates to the effectiveness of the average person in a democratic society to unseat bad leaders. The 2nd pertains to the effectiveness of the individual to utilize his or her capacities toward collective responsibilities and upholding people good. These interests all point to the resident as having a moral duty to head out and take part in the electoral exercise. None the less, ethical and ethical considerations additionally necessitate the view that respecting the choice to avoid electoral workout is consistent with democratic rights.

Get assistance with your essay today, from our professional essay article writers!

certified article writers in the topic of politics are set and waiting that will help you along with your studies.

  • Get assistance with your essay
  • View skillfully written samples

Drawing from Mill, people in a democratic society have the proper to safeguard themselves from things that demean, neglect, and intrude upon them. Because people cannot entirely look after themselves, liberty requires the freedom of individuals to pursue self-protection in a democracy. They're also eligible to pick the level of their governmental involvement in forming, joining and leaving political parties, expressing their opinions on governmental dilemmas, voicing out their sentiments against policies which can be harmful to their interest, and refusing to reveal their political identities or political values. Democratic legal rights are created upon the respect for people’s capacity to help make reasoned judgment. This goes against forcing people to exercise their legal rights or optimize their possibilities and liberties as citizens. We cannot generalize that individuals that do not exercise the proper to vote are due to the fact accusation goes, sluggish, apathetic, or disinterested; rather informed judgments of people would cause them to conclude that voting will not lead to the quest for their self-interests. Smart individuals can argue that by not voting, they truly are pursuing their particular self-interest – by simply making a statement that none of this candidates deserve to be in elective place. Because persons are logical and work toward their specific self-interest, compulsory voting can't be justified because if voting is within their self-interest, there is no need to force them to venture out and vote. They'd decide that voting would be advantageous to them and they would cast their ballot of their own volition.

Compulsory voting will not necessarily uphold fairness or equality.

The situation for compulsory voting normally argued in the problem of fairness and equality. Like Plato’s disdain for apathetic citizens, proponents of compulsory voting anxiety that because all benefit from being citizens of a democratic culture, every resident has an obligation to take part in the electoral procedure. By equality, is supposed that no-one should become a “free rider” in a democracy – free cyclists meaning those who benefit down culture without participating in elections. Supporters of compulsory voting suggest that its a moral and political duty to vote which into the interest of fairness, all should vote because all experience the effects of electoral results. Other strong arguments for compulsory voting include the reality, that voting on election day is a lot easier than other good obligations of residents such as for instance spending taxes, doing jury duty, or performing army solution. However, this argument must paint two teams. On the one hand, you will find voters that are selflessly giving their effort and time to throw their ballot and play a role in people good whilst having said that, you will find non-voters who're selfishly abandoning their governmental duties but directly take advantage of society’s advantages due to the fact very first team that cast their ballots. The point that Mill makes is in a democracy, every person, whether consciously or unconsciously, is acting in what they judge to be their particular self-interest. Voters head out and vote since it is inside their self-interest to vote for their favored candidates to check out them in office. Non-voters cannot be generalized become selfish; it may only be fairly thought that abstaining through the electoral procedure is judged by them to stay their best interest. Democratic concepts appreciate the individual’s logical judgment and ability to make choices; ergo, forcing you to contradict his / her very own logical option is undemocratic. The problem with asserting that it's unfair that citizens vote although some usually do not usually dilutes the dynamism in a democracy.

Compulsory voting also doesn't guarantee equality in terms of motivating equal involvement from various sex or educational teams. While this is certainly asserted by proponents of compulsory voting, there's absolutely no empirical evidence to straight back this up. Studies nonetheless claim that while compulsory voting has been observed to stimulate high voter turnout in a few nations, this has perhaps not been seen to advertise equal participation in those countries. A study (Quintelier, Hooghe, and Marien 2008) shows that specific categories of possible voters keep from voting, leading to the electoral dominance of more privileged groups within the populace. The writers studied 36 countries that took part in the 2004 Global Social Survey Programme. They unearthed that while compulsory voting is associated with greater turnout prices, it offers maybe not led to an important growth in electoral involvement among sex or educational teams.

Get help with your essay today, from our professional essay article writers!

registered authors into the topic of politics are prepared and waiting to help you with your studies.

  • Get assistance with your essay
  • View skillfully written samples

3. Compulsory voting cannot guarantee political legitimacy.

Perhaps the strongest argument for applying compulsory voting in nations is greater voter turnouts fortify the governmental legitimacy of a government. Non-voting is seen to bypass legitimacy while making electoral outcomes at risk of coups or resistance. Whenever you probe deeper into this argument, non-voting could be construed much less apathy but as contentment with all the current operating prospects to make certain that whoever wins the electoral competition, is worth the non-voter’s support. When residents never vote, this does not suggest which they see any political result as illegitimate.

Nevertheless, supporters of compulsory voting are weary of low voter turnout since it undermines representativeness and governmental legitimacy. Lijphart said that “A governmental system utilizing the universal straight to vote but with just a tiny small fraction of residents working out this right should really be viewed as a democracy in simply a… hollow sense of the term” (1997, 11). Proper democratic representation is highly linked to the notion of free elections. By proper is generally meant your results of the electoral contest ended up being in line with the sentiments of a majority of the populace. The ones that help this argument immediately assume that because the elections were participated by most the populace, that governments can assume perpetual legitimacy. This is a misled notion. Legitimacy is conferred not merely through elections, but by the next acts, policies, and decisions created by the government’s leaders that pursue the general welfare of its populace. Really, the votes cast in an election are only a first step toward a government’s claim to legitimacy. The more substantial claim is to be produced by the manner by which it leads and represents the collective interests of its residents. If legitimacy means that federal government had been voted by a majority, then not totally all genuine governments are democratic and never all democracies are legitimate. You will find governments considered to be genuine but have passed undemocratic policies, involved in rampant corruption, or were merely incompetent. Democratic politics is not merely a numbers game. The greater amount of substantive view of democratic politics is that its competitive and cooperative at precisely the same time. Judging political legitimacy according to voter turnout makes an undesirable analogy.

Moreover, regarding the claims of representativeness, data show that compulsory voting isn't an insurance policy become universalized. Numbers from TIP Show that while there are some countries that have shown impressive turnouts because of compulsory voting, the entire image of voter turnout debunks the claim that nations enforcing compulsion have the best voter turnouts. Since 1945, besides Italy, just 4 countries with compulsory voting made it towards top 50 nations arranged with regards to voter turnout: Belgium (84.9 %), Netherlands (84.8), Australia (84.4) and Greece (80.3). 45 out from the 50 nations showing a high voter turnout used voluntary voting. Other nations with compulsory voting have actually the cheapest voter turnout in the world like Egypt which just has a 24.6 % voter turnout, the 2nd cheapest on the planet (IDEA 2010).

Compulsory voting can not be equated to active citizenship.

Equating a top voter turnout to active citizenship is too simplistic. The Australian experience suggested that while voter turnout had been high, the incidence of invalid ballots also increased (Australian Electoral Commission 2006, 4). The phenomenon of donkey voting is a natural effects of compelling residents to vote against their volition. Compulsory voting formalizes the participation of underinformed or uninformed voters who participate in a politically significant process. Opponents of compulsory voting declare that having uninformed voters cast their ballots is even worse than having informed residents avoid the vote. The greater amount of substantive concept of citizenship is how much informed citizens are about their culture while the methods they add in to the democratic process. Their contribution should not be calculated solely on voting alone. As an example, into the U.S., where voter turnout is fairly below in Australia, the potency of general public viewpoint into the U.S. is higher and regulations have now been modified, passed, or rejected in deference to public viewpoint (Mastrel 2003, 960). It could be safe to say that governmental results are worse in the event that populace is uninformed than if the populace cannot wish to vote (Evler, 2009, 32).


There is not any concern that the electoral procedure is an important part of democratic society. Additionally there is no concern that voting is a moral duty of every citizen in a democracy. The question is whether or not an individual may be compelled to vote against his own judgment into the interest of democracy. The conversation unveiled the countless benefits of compulsory voting as experienced in nations like Australia, Belgium, and Italy and exactly how it's contributed to raised voter turnouts. Nevertheless, the reading of democracy ought not to be reduced to the amount of electoral participation alone. Voting, nonetheless crucial it may possibly be is only one kind of governmental involvement, and as experience shows, not an extremely conclusive one. Elected governments have been toppled down, leaders happen eliminated, or declined reelection despite claims to legitimacy as a result of democratic elections. Electoral involvement is valuable as it allows residents available among applicants who are considered the best to lead the nation. Democratic communities respect specific freedom, like the freedom not to ever vote. Voting is a rational option that a citizen decides to work out when it is in his / her most readily useful interest to take action. Compelling her or him to exercise such is undemocratic. The higher turnout rates in nations with compulsory voting may possibly not be necessarily good. Experience indicates that countries with compulsory voting likewise have high invalid or protest votes. Democracy may not be improved when residents head out and vote because they need to and in purchase in order to avoid sanctions. Only if citizens freely choose to be involved in the electoral process can their votes be authentic and truly reflective of their choice. Democratic federal government is a complex system that values not merely electoral involvement but providing avenues for folks to state their option, equality, freedom, and reasoned judgment.

Get assistance with your essay today, from our professional essay article writers!

registered writers in topic of politics are set and waiting to assist you with your studies.

  • Get assistance with your essay
  • View professionally written samples

How to cite this essay: