Mandatory Voting For All US Citizens, Good Idea Or Not?

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Recently Obama came out in favor of mandatory voting for US citizens and I wanted to to see what the political Hypesters thought about this. Personally I don't feel like forcing people to vote is the right way to go about it and I think the uninformed idiots would actually do more harm than good but on the flip side of that if it actually motivate a good majority to become informed and get active in the political process of our country than that would be a good thing.

Here is a good article about it and the tech that we could be used in the 2016 election to make it happen:

The voting system in the US is deplorable. Not only is our methodology outdated, we have the lowest turnout rate of any developed nation. The solution to almost every election-related challenge is to make voting mandatory. And with a little tech reform, we could do it in time for the 2016 presidential election.

Part of the reason for low turnout in the US is political apathy, but another big reason is that the act of voting itself is a pain. If the process was streamlined, standardized, and more convenient, more people could vote. More importantly, as our own elected president Barack Obama argued last week, mandatory voting helps ensure that the voices of disenfranchised voters are heard.


The idea of mandatory voting floats in and out of national consciousness after every poorly-attended election. And now bad turnout is reaching epic proportions. Last fall's midterm elections had the worst turnout in 72 years: Only 36.3 percent of eligible voters went to the polls. These low numbers skew the results because not all demographic groups are likely to vote. So far, the country's best idea to improve turnout is holding lotteries with large cash rewards just to get people to show up. Not exactly democracy in action.

Here's where we can look to the approximately 26 countries which currently have compulsory voting, according to the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Australia is often cited as a popular example by American supporters, although Brazil's population is closer to the US in size. What is notable in both those countries is how mandatory voting has lead to larger election-related improvements. Australia introduced compulsory voting in 1924, and in the years since that time the country has implemented more sweeping reforms that result in fairer elections. These include preferential voting, where voters rank the candidates by preference.

Here in the US, such reforms might mean that the election cycle would no longer be consumed by the campaign finance scams and voter ID laws that attempt to suppress the electorate.

Critics have denigrated the idea of mandatory voting for decades, saying it smacks of socialism. Civil liberties groups note that choosing not to vote is its own form of free speech. (Although in a mandatory voting system it's perfectly acceptable to turn in a blank ballot—as long as you vote.) But putting aside ideology, a more fundamental concern about mandatory voting is how to implement the concept. What would be the basic systems architecture, design, and technology?

Just a few years ago, mandatory voting in the US would have seemed impossible because of these questions. But now we have a precedent: Universal healthcare.

Registering voters online

The deployment of Healthcare.gov didn't go particularly smoothly (UNDERSTATEMENT), but it is the first feasible model for how mandatory voting might be rolled out. Bear with me here. You might not personally have been required to use the system, but an estimated 16.4 million Americans successfully registered for health insurance using the site. That's a much smaller group than the roughly 250 million registrations we'd need for voting, but it's not an insignificant number. After all the drama, Healthcare.gov turned out to be a reasonably effective way to get people signed up for a government mandate online.

What the rollout of Healthcare.gov proved is that there is greater potential for internet-based government processes. The best model in existence is the UK's award-winning digital services portal which brings all sorts of government services online, using one account, in a streamlined, easy-to-navigate interface. A similar US system could be used not just for voting registration, but to also file your taxes, serve on juries, and renew your drivers' license.

Could the US pull it off? Maybe the original Healthcare.gov portal was a mess, but since then the federal government has changed its leadership for tech projects. There is now a specific arm of government, including a Chief Technology Officer and a Department of Digital Service, that could oversee such a mandatory voting initiative and ensure that all eligible voters were registered and ready to cast their ballots.

Redesigning the voting experience

Here's the silver lining of bureaucracy: When every American citizen is required to vote, the system would have to handle three times as many voters as it does now. The government would be absolutely required to improve the actual ballot-ticking experience.

Most of the country is still checking boxes on confusingly-designed ballots, using the antiquated medium of ink on paper, which varies from polling place to polling place. Designers and voting rights activists have spent decades trying to propose a universal ballot design and voting methodology, which would not only end up saving the country money, it would also instill greater confidence in democracy. While we might not be ready to vote via smartphones by 2016, mandatory voting would be an opportunity to figure out a better process — and one that's secure, too. Each polling place would have the same internet-deployed, touchscreen-based voting system, which is how about a third of the country already votes. In Brazil, where voting is compulsory, 100 percent of ballots are cast this way.

The idea of everyone in the US voting on the same day might conjure up images of waiting in line at your local polling place for hours, but additional technology could help make it even more convenient. In Brazil and India, voting kiosks are used as a mobile solution to bring democracy to the streets. Using biometric registration for national ID cards to authenticate voters (similar to the way you provide your fingerprint when you get your drivers' license), touchscreen interfaces with an audio component allow anyone to cast ballots, even if voters can't speak the predominant language or are visually impaired.

There's some precedent for this in the US as well: In Oregon, a pilot program let elderly and otherwise incapacitated citizens vote on iPads if they couldn't make it to the polls. By the 2016 election, it would be absolutely possible to implement a combination of programs like this to make sure that every vote is counted.

Enforcing the new program

Even if mandatory voting was implemented, and a secure digital system for doing so successfully rolled out, there's still the question of how to enforce the sweeping new rule. Here again we can take a cue from countries that currently require compulsory voting—and add our own special twist.

The level of enforcement currently varies from nation to nation. Some countries like Australia and Belgium threaten fines or jail time for refusing to fulfill your civic duty, but these fines are small and often not collected. Others offer specific penalties: In Brazil, you might not be able to get your passport renewed, for example, if you didn't vote in the last election.

While a system of fines and penalties could be implemented, I believe one solution is simply making it as easy as possible for Americans to set aside that time to vote so no one will complain about their new civic duties. Which brings me to my last suggestion: There's only one way to ensure that people will take voting as seriously as other national pastimes. In many of the countries where voting is mandatory, elections are on the weekend. We need to make Election Day a federal holiday—one you can spend with your friends and family, heading to the polls together, perhaps, as a socially focused day of action. Not just a day off work, but a country-wide celebration of democracy.

http://gizmodo.com/its-time-for-mandatory-voting-and-we-have-the-technolog-1692456639

I think they bring up some good points and ideas for it, What say you?

 

[hippie_hunter]

Absolutely not. Frankly, Obama wishing for mandatory voting just makes him come off as more butt hurt over the 2010 and 2014 midterms than anything else because he built a coalition of unreliable midterm voters.

And on principle I think mandatory voting is wrong. One of the best ways to protest IMO is not going out to vote for candidates that you do not believe in. For example, I think Latinos willfully sitting out in 2014 was the perfect message to the Democrats that they are not going to be taken for granted, but at the same time, you can't expect them to vote Republican. I also firmly believe that stupid people should not be voting.

 

[SV Fan]

One of the best ways to protest IMO is not going out to vote for candidates that you do not believe in.

Well their is always voting for 3rd parties or do a vote of no confidence(ie hand in a blank ballot)

 

[hippie_hunter]

Well their is always voting for 3rd parties or do a vote of no confidence(ie hand in a blank ballot)

But why waste the time voting for candidates that have no shot of winning? Time is a very valuable asset and why should people waste their time voting for candidates they don't believe in, handing in a blank ballot, etc. People have jobs, a lot of people have to drive to their voting booths which costs gas money, and other obligations. If anything, willfully not showing up is just as valid as a blank ballot.

 

[SV Fan]

But why waste the time voting for candidates that have no shot of winning? Time is a very valuable asset and why should people waste their time voting for candidates they don't believe in, handing in a blank ballot, etc. People have jobs, a lot of people have to drive to their voting booths which costs gas money, and other obligations. If anything, willfully not showing up is just as valid as a blank ballot.

Well there is other things on the ballot beyond voting for a President or congressman that might hold some importance to having public input.

In terms of gas money and time, how about adopting what they are doing in Oregon, where you can mail in your ballots.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Well there is other things on the ballot beyond voting for a President or congressman that might hold some importance to having public input.

And most people don't even know who the hell their local candidates are. Frankly, I don't want those kind of voters.

In terms of gas money and time, how about adopting what they are doing in Oregon, where you can mail in your ballots.

Valid point. But still doesn't change that willfully not voting is also a way to demonstrate your annoyance with the system and the two major parties. The Latino bloc is the perfect bloc to demonstrate this in that Democrats trying to take advantage of them while Republicans consistently alienating them, thus they did not go out and vote.

And like I said, I think this complaining about low voting rates comes from the same kind of people who complain about conservative groups donating money. It's not that they're arguing these things out of principle, they're only arguing it simply because it doesn't work in their favor.

Just like how I have the right to vote if I choose to exercise it, I also have the right to not vote if I choose to do so. I should not be penalized for doing something that is my right. No one should be punished for exercising or caring not to exercise, their rights.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I have mixed feelings on this.

I do however think that the pros outweigh the cons. You would have a lot less crazy people in the congress. Or, at least less crazy people.

I haven't read many studies on the 40% of eligible voters who don't vote, but I know many, many people who don't vote. They vote because they're convinced their vote won't make a difference, or they simply don't have time. And of course there are many who just don't care.

I think voting days should be national holidays. That at the very least seems like something both sides should be able to agree on. Republicans of course won't, since most people who would benefit from that are likely to vote Democrat.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I do agree that Obama's intentions are probably cynical and political. Republicans have become the party that wants to suppress voters, and Democrats want to do everything short of letting people vote on their cell phones.

But at the end of the day, this is supposed to be a democracy, and for that alone, I would have to side with the Democrats, even if their reasons are largely, if not entirely politically motivated.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

How about an incentive to voting?

Like a lottery.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

But why waste the time voting for candidates that have no shot of winning? Time is a very valuable asset and why should people waste their time voting for candidates they don't believe in, handing in a blank ballot, etc. People have jobs, a lot of people have to drive to their voting booths which costs gas money, and other obligations. If anything, willfully not showing up is just as valid as a blank ballot.

Well like the article in the OP stated you could make voting day a national holiday, that way people aren't penalized for it and it will be something that folks could look forward to. But I agree I really don't want stupid people just christmas treeing their ballots just because they have to

 

[Thundercrack85]

Voting is a civic duty. It shouldn't be monetarily incentivized.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Voting is a civic duty. It shouldn't be monetarily incentivized.

I agree with that but I also think making it a national holiday (regardless if it's mandatory or not) would actually go a long way to help the public get out and vote and get involved in the process. As it stands now most people work and regardless of when your shift is getting to the polls is sometimes difficult depending on your area. I always do the mail in ballot but a lot of people aren't familiar with this option and the one thing I always worry about is if my vote is actually counted since they compare your signature and if it doesn't match they throw it out. I have very crappy handwriting BTW

 

[Thundercrack85]

Republicans would never allow that. Between Voter ID laws, voting against same day voter registration, limiting early voting, poll taxes and reducing the number of polling locations they've been quite effective at suppressing voting.

Why Democrats aren't making an epic stink out of that, is beyond me. Is there anything more underhanded and un-American than suppressing people's most basic civil liberty?

Republicans have declared war on voting, and they're winning.

The Democrats should be crying bloody murder. Instead, they're mumbling.

 

[SV Fan]

Well like the article in the OP stated you could make voting day a national holiday, that way people aren't penalized for it and it will be something that folks could look forward to. But I agree I really don't want stupid people just christmas treeing their ballots just because they have to

Why not have a national voting weekend(fri-sun)

And like I said, I think this complaining about low voting rates comes from the same kind of people who complain about conservative groups donating money. It's not that they're arguing these things out of principle, they're only arguing it simply because it doesn't work in their favor

I honestly do think any one person pumping millions of dollars into one election is disgusting and they do need to make limits on donations and how much a campaign can use(this goes both sides that are bought and paid for by big business of some sort). I won't lie about the voting, yeah if it was determined higher voting turnout would favor Republicans I wouldn't be for ways to try turn out more people(although I wouldn't go out of my way to try disenfranchise voting that votes Republican). lol

 

[jmc]

We have mandatory voting down here. Really all you have to do is get your name ticked off at the voting station, plenty of people who care little for politics simply choose to place a blank ballot in the voting box. You're not forced to vote per se.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

Well there is other things on the ballot beyond voting for a President or congressman that might hold some importance to having public input.

In terms of gas money and time, how about adopting what they are doing in Oregon, where you can mail in your ballots.

Even with mail-in ballots, many counties in Oregon still rarely see over 80% turnout in presidential elections. Midterms and primaries are even worse, with 65-70% turnout being on the high-end. Just because it seems more convenient, it doesn't exactly encourage any higher turnout when compared to the older physical polling booths. Typically, ballots are sent out anywhere from 2-4 weeks before election day so if people can't bother to vote or even register in that period of time, then that just reinforces my belief that only those in-tune enough with the issues and candidates should bother casting their votes.

 

[Greens]

Honestly, forcing people who don't care about politics to vote isn't gonna get you anywhere.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I have mixed feelings on this.

I do however think that the pros outweigh the cons. You would have a lot less crazy people in the congress. Or, at least less crazy people.

I haven't read many studies on the 40% of eligible voters who don't vote, but I know many, many people who don't vote. They vote because they're convinced their vote won't make a difference, or they simply don't have time. And of course there are many who just don't care.

I think voting days should be national holidays. That at the very least seems like something both sides should be able to agree on. Republicans of course won't, since most people who would benefit from that are likely to vote Democrat.

I would lose money if voting were turned into a national holiday.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I honestly do think any one person pumping millions of dollars into one election is disgusting and they do need to make limits on donations and how much a campaign can use(this goes both sides that are bought and paid for by big business of some sort).

$20 says that if were a major interest group that you side with, you would have no problem with them dumping millions of dollars into one election.

I won't lie about the voting, yeah if it was determined higher voting turnout would favor Republicans I wouldn't be for ways to try turn out more people(although I wouldn't go out of my way to try disenfranchise voting that votes Republican). lol

That's just beyond hypocritical.

 

[Leenie]

Absolutely not. Frankly, Obama wishing for mandatory voting just makes him come off as more butt hurt over the 2010 and 2014 midterms than anything else because he built a coalition of unreliable midterm voters.

And on principle I think mandatory voting is wrong. One of the best ways to protest IMO is not going out to vote for candidates that you do not believe in. For example, I think Latinos willfully sitting out in 2014 was the perfect message to the Democrats that they are not going to be taken for granted, but at the same time, you can't expect them to vote Republican. I also firmly believe that stupid people should not be voting.

100% this.

For the first time since I could vote, I am actually considering on not voting in 2016 (depending on who the candidates are, but I won't delve into that). That's my right and choice as a U.S. Citizen to not vote if I don't want to. Plain and simple.

 

[herakles]

While I think that everyone should vote! While it is a Right it should ultimately be a choice if and when you want to cast your vote. No one person or government should force you to do something that is already a Right.

IF we make voting mandatory then why not have term limits and force everyone to serve on municipal, State and Federal counsel seats. Make everyone really get involved just like the Ancient Athenians!

 

[SV Fan]

$20 says that if were a major interest group that you side with, you would have no problem with them dumping millions of dollars into one election.

I honesty feel the less big business money in elections the better it will be for the common man

That's just beyond hypocritical.

Well it's mainly in regards to the everybody votes idea. I know everybody votes generally would favor the Democrats most likely which is why I don't mind the idea. lol

As I said I am not for screwing over people who vote Republican, I think a perfect example is absentee ballots, those are the worst offenders for voter fraud but I am still for them(generally those favor Republicans, which is why it's hard to see Republican Voter fraud laws are legit when they don't go after the worst offender of voter fraud)

 

[famicommander]

Ridiculous. Voting is just an endorsement of a corrupt system. If voting could really change anything important they wouldn't let you do it.

 

[CaptainWagner]

I'd say know. It's better to have less people vote than to have the elections flooded with people who don't really know anything about who and what they're voting for.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

While I think that everyone should vote! While it is a Right it should ultimately be a choice if and when you want to cast your vote. No one person or government should you to do something that is already a Right.

IF we make voting mandatory then why not have term limits and force everyone to serve on municipal, State and Federal counsel seats. Make everyone really get involved just like the Ancient Athenians!

I like this idea right here! We could even take it a step further and go full Starship Trooper and everyone has to serve in the military to become a full citizen, I bet your ass then people would pay attention to who the hell they vote for when they have the power to ship your ass out to war