Compulsory Suffrage

[Bizud]

Should voting be mandatory? In Australia, you get a hefty fine for not voting.

I know the freedom argument (my RIGHT not to vote) is a strong one, ideally, but as long as we're stuck with this imperfect democracy, we sometimes have to resort to imperfect solutions, at least as a temporary measure.

The only problem, as I see it, with enforced voting is that the voter turnout is often used to measure how satisfied the public is with the state of affairs. Ergo, I propose:

Voting should be mandatory, BUT, there should be an option on the ballot for "null vote." That way, at least everyone goes out to cast their vote, and if, say, we got "Gore 20%, Bush 18%, Nader 1%, Null 61%," then it would send a clear message that people don't like any of the candidates.

Whaddaya think?

[Slizor]

If the aim is to increase democracy then it is a good idea, but would have to be used in conjunction with other ideas, like starting to teach politics as a core subject and a independent nationalised media source.

Also, you owuld have to consider what would happen if there was such a big null vote.

[Bizud]

Absolutely.

A big null vote would be mostly a message sender. Among other things, it would let the government know that the people aren't satisfied, and assumedly the people would know that the government knows this, and the government would know that the people know that they know. You know?

[whitedragon-my]

Remember that Democracy only works if the people are educated. And since most educated people vote anyway you'd just be forcing a large population of stupid hicks to vote. And who knows what'd that do ~cough~ Bush ~cough~.

[mulder-xuk]

i'm just bringing the scottish view to this

no matter which way i vote i know that the country will get fucked a little more

in the time the conseritive party was in power from 1979 to 1997 the had some scandle almost every single day and they are still coming out of the wood work now

labour is who we have now with tony blair all i can see that they have done is deevloved government in scotland and wales but even then for any scottish law to be passed it needs to go to westminster to be passed

the liberal democrats are the biggest party after labour and the conseritives and they don't have much chance of being elected to power in the next few years

there are lots of smaller partys my favorite is the monster raving looney party who used to be run by a man called lord haha before he died

but to sum up the 3 partys most likely to be voted to power in the uk are as bad as each other and they will all fuck up the country even more

p.s. in the scottish parliament the main opposing party is the scottish national party who only got really popular after the release of the film braveheart they have promised to make scotland totally indpendent but to do that they need to put a paper in the scottish parliment which if passed in scotland has to go to england and be passed by the house of lords which used to be powerful now they can only delay for a year then it has to go through (i think this applies to central government in london only) bottom line is that scotland will never be indpendent in my life time

[mulder-xuk]

oh i forgot to mention this year is an election year for the scottish parliament and given the choice to vote or not vote i think i'll stay away

not because i'm some hick who doesn't understand whats going on but because i studied the scottish parliment and the one in london and found that they look like they do something for the people who elected them but really all they are doing is giving with one hand and taking away with the other

[Slizor]

labour is who we have now with tony blair all i can see that they have done is deevloved government in scotland and wales but even then for any scottish law to be passed it needs to go to westminster to be passed

Labour have done a lot that they haven't screamed about. Such as the "Tax Credits"(which gives working families lower taxes.) And the Private Finance Initiatives(where they borrow money from banks for public works) is either increadably myopic, or, more likely, Tony Blair is planning on an increase of taxes. Which is good.

the liberal democrats are the biggest party after labour and the conseritives and they don't have much chance of being elected to power in the next few years

Hmm, I think the Conservatives hang in the balance, if the Lib Dems beat them in the next election then the Conservatives will probably become a minority party.

there are lots of smaller partys my favorite is the monster raving looney party who used to be run by a man called lord haha before he died

He was actually called Screaming Lord Sutch. I'm not sure who it is run by now, it was run by a cat for a while, who sadly got run over.

[Slizor]

A big null vote would be mostly a message sender. Among other things, it would let the government know that the people aren't satisfied, and assumedly the people would know that the government knows this, and the government would know that the people know that they know. You know?

But I would bring up big problems about legitimacy. If the majority of the people vote null then a legitimate government can't really be formed.

[Freakapotimus]

First you need to remember that the US is not a democracy, but a democratic republic.

The "null vote" idea certainly helped in high school when there was only one person running for a certain office but no one liked her.

The right not to vote is a good one, but people that choose not to vote should not complain and bitch about the people in office. The exceptions are the under-voting-age people who are interesting in politics and debate.

[Ted-Easton]

They should do that once. Mandatory voting once every three terms of office. people can exercise their right, but refusing to vote completely, even for null, is just obstructionist and stupid.

[TheShrike]

That actually sounds like a wonderful idea.
Too many Americans complain about the fact that the government is wrong or doesn't listen to them, but most of the people who complain about politics and politicians and public issues don't vote.
Wonderful idea...

Only one problem.
Middle America.. The Bible Belt...
Do we really want people who don't know what's going on and whom are easily influenced by TV personalities to vote on important isssues? What about Florida (sorry, couldn't help that one)

Think about that

[A-Carrot-By-Dr-Riot]

I was thinking of launching a "Don't Vote" campaign.
if you don't understand the issues, don't waste your time.

There could be commercials where one guy votes, and it doesn't count for much at all, then someone else who eats an icecream cone, and has a happy look on his face.

[TwinClock]

At 1/17/03 03:13 AM, Dr_Arbitrary wrote: I was thinking of launching a "Don't Vote" campaign.
if you don't understand the issues, don't waste your time.

There could be commercials where one guy votes, and it doesn't count for much at all, then someone else who eats an icecream cone, and has a happy look on his face.

Kind of like the thing the daily show(comedy central) did on the midterm elections where everyone gets re-elected because all the politicians are evil and destroy any opponents they might have, and that since there's so many of them no one care what/who they are individually. And they say that nothing you do matters.