To vote or not to vote, or to be forced to vote

Although democratic voting exists in most countries, few have made it a legal citizen duty. According to Wolfgang Hirczy de Mino, author of the article “Compulsory Voting”, “it is an option available to new democracies and worth contemplating as a means to assure high levels of voting, which is likely to enhance the legitimacy of representative institutions and of the political system generally.” Compulsory voting has been adopted by long-standing stable democracies such as Australia, Belgium and the Netherlands; it was also adopted by not so stable democracies in Latin America (Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica and Ecuador). Mino argues that although high levels of turnout can be found under voluntary voting, compulsory voting definitely guarantees a higher rate of participation from the electorate. The highest gains from establishing mandatory voting would be in countries where voter participation is low. In addition, the law requiring voting would have to be enforced and respected by citizens in order to achieve a higher voter turnout. Lastly, Mino makes a very valuable point on how compulsory voting makes campaigning more efficient for candidates: “When the state assumes responsibility for citizens turning up at the polling stations, parties and candidate can focus on promoting their programs and on swaying voters, rather than dissipating their energies on getting the voters to come.” The argument standing against compulsory vote is more of ideological content. “The most common objection on normative grounds is that citizens ought to have the right NOT to vote as much as the right to vote. Some citizens boycott the election on principle arguing that compulsory voting impinges upon this basic freedom, while many people's failure to vote is borne out of apathy” stated Mino. “The 'right to abstain' is often asserted in the United States, and explicable with reference to its individualistic and rights-focused political culture, but the argument is aired elsewhere as well.” Furthermore, compulsory voting requires a heavy bureaucracy and administrative costs – voter information must be recorded, fines and punishments are issued to those non-voters. I don’t think being forced to vote is truly a democratic act. It actually seems silly to me being forced to go vote on certain occasions if I have no candidate I wish to vote for (the option “no candidate” is on the ballot). I also don’t see how mandatory voting would reflect the interest of the majority. A lot of completely uninformed and uninterested people in countries like Brazil or Ecuador vote every election without knowing much about their candidate. At least the voter in countries where voting is voluntary has some kind of interest or knowledge on the candidate he or she is voting for. I do agree that society would benefit from a larger and stable electorate. Spending a lot of resources on getting people to vote and not enough on the candidate’s political platform seems inefficient. Less resources are necessary when the population has already been mobilized to vote; yet, because there is a very large and fixed amount of people voting, resources get plundered anyways. Ultimately, not only I see voting as a right, but also, I believe that coercion does not necessarily bring the best interests of the majority. http://www.aceproject.org/main/english/es/esc07a.htm by: Carla Larangeira