A couple of days ago, a commenter suggested that a shift to mandatory voting might help reinvigorate American democracy.
I once thought the only countries requiring citizens to cast ballots were the ones running phony elections, the countries where autocrats could claim an overwhelming mandate after marching people to the polls, but a few years ago, during a cruise of Croatia, I met a retired professor of public administration from Australia, who disabused me of that belief.
It turns out that countries like Australia, Belgium and Brazil all require citizens to cast ballots. In such countries, including Australia, modest fines for non-voting are typically assessed. In Belgium, non-voters may be fined and they may also face disenfranchisement for repeatedly abstaining. In Brazil: voting is also compulsory, but the rule makes several accommodations for illiterate citizens, the elderly, and those living abroad.
Mandatory voting rules require citizens of voting age to register and participate in elections. Penalties for noncompliance range from small fees to restrictions on public services. (In some countries, like Brazil, proof of compliance is needed for public employment or for obtaining a passport.)
In most systems, the rules contain exemptions for valid reasons for not voting– illness, travel, or even religious objections may exempt individuals from penalties. And use of mail-in or other absentee ballots are considered to be in compliance. The mandate is not onerous.
Even people who want to show affirmative disdain for all of the candidates can comply with the law by submitting a blank or spoiled ballot–signifying their vote for “none of the above.”
There’s a fairly substantial body of academic literature analyzing the effects of mandatory voting.
Unsurprisingly, turnout increases dramatically (duh!), but research has also suggested other salutary outcomes. Researchers have found that compulsory voting reduces “socioeconomic biases” in voter turnout. (In countries without required voting, the majority of people who fail to vote are typically poorer.) Vote totals in mandatory systems thus reflect the sentiments of a broader cross-section of the society. As a result, some studies have suggested that governments in countries with mandatory voting are more likely to adopt policies that benefit broader segments of society.
Critics of mandatory voting argue that forcing uninterested or uninformed individuals to vote dilutes the quality of electoral decisions. A 2009 study titled Full Participation: A Comparative Study of Compulsory Voting, for example, highlighted these concerns about uninformed voting. (On the other hand, those of us who live in the U.S. can attest to the fact that making voting mandatory could hardly turn out a higher percentage of uninformed voters that those who routinely go to the polls here. Data shows that Donald Trump’s margin of victory was greatest among those who consume little or no news.”)
When I was doing some superficial research for this post, I also found pundits who argue that making voting mandatory infringes on individual freedom. (Civil libertarian that I am, that was actually my initial reaction during discussion with my fellow passenger.) On reflection, however, I have changed my mind–for a couple of reasons.
I have often said that taxes are the dues we pay for a functioning society, but taxes represent only one part of those “dues.” Other obligations of citizenship include obeying laws and responding to summonses for jury duty. Surely casting a ballot can be considered another such obligation.
Over and above the inclusion of voting as a duty of citizenship, however, is the likely effect of such a mandate on policy.
Poll after poll shows large majorities of citizens supporting or opposing particular policies –preferences that are routinely ignored by America’s lawmakers. Most lawmakers who feel safe ignoring public opinion are the Representatives elected to the House who have been gerrymandered into “safe” districts. As I have often noted, however, gerrymandering is a voter suppression tactic. In a large number of those districts, universal turnout would make purportedly “safe” districts far more competitive–and would send a signal to incumbents that they might actually need to listen to their constituents.
When it comes to the election contests that aren’t subject to gerrymandering–Governors, Senators, President–universal turnout could not possibly give us worse results than those of the 2024 elections.
Will the United States ever impose mandatory voting? Doubtful, in a country where millions of people resist the most modest measures to protect the health and well-being of their neighbors.
But it’s certainly worth putting on our wish list….
I have heard this “solution” to low voting rates before and each time it brings back the same vivid memory of one neighbor when I moved to Florida. She was a German lady in her 80s, Gertrud Grundling spoke with a heavy German accent in 1994 even though she came here in the early 1930s. Her fiance had come to America to establish employment and home while she waited in Germany for her clearance to join him. The morning of her departure the police came to her door to escort her to vote for Adolph Hitler before leaving, if she refused she would not be allowed to leave Germany. No one was running against Hitler whom she hated but to get out of Germany she voted for him.
We on this blog have made references before about the comparison of those “good Germans” who didn’t know what was going around them and the “good Americans” who are ignoring what has gone on for ten years and resulted in the loss of democracy in the 2024 presidential election. The loss of what used to be citizens united in American values, morals and priorities, which included viable opposition political parties, lost loyalty along with unity. Forcing a “right” may result in an end worse than what we are faced with at this time. Republican voters are retaliating for what they view as a denial of their rights by voting for revenge by a known enemy of the Constitution.
Wow,
I can see all sorts of issues with that. A lot of write in candidates, real or fiction. President Mickey mouse? President James T. Kirk? People will be contrarian just to be contrarian, lol.
Governments that are ripe for change, are rife with shenanigans and scandal. Take a look back through history, and notice those collapsed powers that required a person to pick a side. See how many are still thriving through the centuries or millenia. Humanity is too ignorant to facilitate anything everlasting. It all devolves into a conglomeration of decadence and corruption.
So are the sane of us, just supposed to lie down and take this crap Mango Mussolini and his cronies want to turn this country into? The poor and the undereducated don’t vote because they truly feel no one listens to what they want and need. Career politicians need to stop. Gerrymandering needs to stop. Filibusters needs to stop.
I’ve always felt that if anyone can vote by phone for a TV show winner, why can’t we use a phone to vote for legal stuff too?
Open primaries and Rank-order voting
I went to a public high school. School was much better when those that wanted to leave where allowed to leave (I think the drop out age was 16 then or after sophomore year). In all probability, forcing people to participate in an activity will not make that activity better.
I second Jim’s comment! Open primaries and rank-order voting would be a huge improvement over the present system.
As I mentioned when it was suggested, the oligarchy would never allow it. They rigged the country to prevent a democratic takeover, and as others have mentioned, it’s working very well. The oligarchs don’t even try to hide the fact that they own and control the highest court in the land.
As John mentioned, Americans aren’t very bright, and most could not tell an interviewer the three branches of government. We can’t even get universal healthcare when it would save the country’s taxpayers billions of dollars. Our current privatized system has been unsustainable for decades, and only every civilized society has been able to accomplish this obviously smart move, but the US. The oligarchs have been oppressing the plebes long before the formation of our country.
And thanks to the corruption of #GenocideJoe, the democrats have handed Trump a gift to pardon all the J6 offenders. The US Justice system is a joke, and both parties are corrupted up to their eyeballs, but the American people think it’s only the other party.
Anything benefitting the plebes has taken years of protests, so mandatory voting has no chance in our country. None. Neither party would be allowed even to introduce it for discussion. Worse yet, the ignorant Americans would see it as an infringement of their liberties and fight an obvious anti-oligarchy rule.
p.s. If you haven’t had the chance to read Jane Mayer’s article in The New Yorker about Pete Hegseth, it’s worth a read. It’s a masterful piece of journalism. If he gets confirmed, Washington is brain-dead:
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/pete-hegseths-secret-history?
This subject came up in our home a few days ago, precipitating a lively discussion, so your thoughts on it are appreciated. I am appalled at the thought of only 64% of eligible voters in this country having enough interest to carry out that privilege. Out of 245 million eligible voters, over 89 million didn’t bother. That is irresponsible, unfathomable and unacceptable. I believe those who didn’t vote would have leaned toward Dems, and that would produce better outcomes, but that isn’t the point. It is a right, a privilege, a sacred action, even (and this follows your blog) a duty. We the people, all of us, have the opportunity to choose how we are governed, and it only makes real sense if everyone is involved.
It seems to me that mandatory voting would also be a boon to viable third parties. If nobody likes the two who predominate our political landscape, suppose those eighty nine million voted for a qualified candidate from another party?
So, if vaccine mandates were so popular…..and they saved lives….what y’all been drinkin’??
Like it or not, the country is on the eve of a single-party system. Which one it will be depends on the electorate’s reaction to the results of the next four years.
Mandatory voting sounds like an interesting idea to me. Sure, it may have some bugs, but what does not? Any law/regulation that requires it could include some safeguards against the scenario JoAnn describes, and create a national holiday for it.
Pete; Trump promised a number of times that if you voted for him you would never have to vote again. With his SCOTUS immunity secured at this time, we may not be allowed an electorate reaction to the results of the next four years.
We are already seeing Democrats seeking Trump’s favor, Republicans returning to the MAGA party in hopes of Trump’s favor and a Pardon for criminal acts coming to light and media owners, fearing Musk, seeking Trump’s favor. Trump is already in power in case you haven’t noticed.
Heather Cox Richardson mentioned the tallies of voters in her Facebook live session yesterday. It’s an hour 7 minutes long and worth it. She stated that informed voters voted for Harris 3:1. Uninformed voters who don’t follow politics voted for 45 (he shall not be named) and the ratio was 19:1.
We got our mail in ballots in CA a month before the election. It was very helpful for me being new to the state/county. I was able to look at the booklet that got mailed separately, who the candidates were and pros and cons of each referendum. There were many of those so the booklet was helpful. Every registered voter got this information. I don’t know if they have finished counting everything but the participation levels were close to 70% in my county. I think mail in ballots would help more voters actually vote. I would like mandatory voting.
Having Election Day as a national holiday is MUCH more doable. It really helps folks who can’t take off work to vote. The best suggestion I have seen is to combine it with Veteran’s Day so you can market it as “these folks were willing to die for your right to vote”….
First we do away with the Electoral College. When people think that their vote really doesn’t matter, especially in states with a small Electoral College vote count, why should they bother. Especially states that have the “winner takes all” caveat.
This is assuming we still have elections after King Trump has his way with us for 4 LONG years! With nut jobs like Patel, Hegseth and Kennedy heading up key departments, we could all be under house arrest or dead!
The first paper I wrote as a nontraditional student (over 30, 3 kids, married) argued that voting was not necessarily a right but an obligation to those who gave the ultimate sacrifice.
At the time there was a very close election of Orenlicker we which was decided by if I remember right less than a handful of votes.
Hearing over and over that the incoming dipshit has a mandate given by the overwhelming majority (no wonder US math scores are so low) of the amercan people , compulsary voting would either make it true or false instead of a wild claim.
JoAnne, politics is not governance because governance is more complex.
Politics is advertising for politicians, policies, and parties. In prior years, governance was constrained to the Constitution and the whims of the informed and misinformed electorate.
At the moment, before the first thing has been done, Maga politics has had a successful advertising campaign, but what happens next is four years of broken governance.
That will sway many voters back to the original two parties sans MAGA.
Will MAGA go voluntarily or not? I have no idea. It is driven by wealth redistribution up because that’s what capitalism does.
The electorate of millions of voters is still in control.
I don’t think the people who Trump’s donors bought the minds of will be loyal to poverty after all.