Mandatory Voting in the US - Essay Example

Mandatory Voting Voting is not a static process; it evolves and varies according to various stages in its processes. However, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, claims John Miller, City Council member, in the article, "Let's not change the voting laws." According to Miller, "Our current voting process works just fine", so said because he believes only those who are mature, informed and interested will vote and these are exactly the voters we wish to be making such important decisions as who will be the next president. Miller argues that he "doesn't want some idiot who doesn't know anything about the issue deciding who will be president or whether to raise my taxes"; rather he has confidence in the mature and intelligent people who turn out to vote. Miller claims "to change that would be a recipe for disaster." In my opinion, Miller is correct in his assessment of the present state of affairs working well as is and that lowering the voting age would not be beneficial; however changes in our current voting laws to offer an incentive could be implemented to make them more effective. While the current electoral system is not producing a high percentage of citizens voting, the alternatives - to levy incentives or penalties or lower the voting age - do not address the core problems. The American voting process is a well-thought out plan that works, however voter turnout will not increase until citizens relate the importance to their own well-being and lowering the voting age would not help; conversely the institution of an "apathy tax" as penalty for not voting could be effective. As Miller states, the current electoral system in the United States is working just as it should. However, there is no doubt that with the current system, voter turnout has been poor. One of the main reasons for this is that citizens do not view voting as being in their own best interests. They reason that there is nothing tangible realized from voting; no strong motive to do so, and consequently, they do nothing. This is, according to John Dean, columnist for Findlaw.com and former counsel to the President of the United States in his 2003 article "Is It Time to Consider Mandatory Voting Laws", a national disgrace, and rightly so. Generation after generation, the percentage of citizens voting declines. It is critical to note that without a standard in addition to the established voting system, the present problems and issues keeping citizens from the polls will continue. Voters must be prodded in a way which appeals to their sense of obligation to society in order to become properly registered and exercise their right to vote. Citizens must remember there is a social contract with their government which loses its legitimacy if they do not vote. When voters are lax about upholding their end of the agreement, it becomes imperative to look more closely at the role of government and whether the electoral process is focused on the results at the polls or what is the best process for electing the country's leader. It will take a concerted effort to convince citizens to forgo their natural apathy and do what is best for the democratic system of the United States, however, it is not the system itself which must be reformed. Lowering the legal voting age has been proposed by some but to do so would be ineffective in ensuring mature, informed votes. Citizens younger than 18 are not mature enough, nor have they sufficient experience to make an informed voting decision; many would simply vote in tandem with their parents or other influential adults without the ability to use their own critical judgment. However, targeting 18-year-old voters would be very beneficial, as Democrat Joe Coto proposes, according to the 2007 Sacramento Bee article by Jim Sanders, "Register to Vote, Get Diploma". Coto has recently authored a bill, AB 183, which would induce young people to register to vote or be penalized by not receiving their high school diploma. In this way, the message becomes clear that our political system requires citizens "to keep working at our democracy, reinvesting in it, educating people about it, impressing on them the importance" (Coto, from Sanders). It is important that government reinforces the role of citizens so they are cognizant of their right to vote and the passing of the bill would go a long way toward achieving this goal. Some have argued that AB 183 would create an unnecessary clerical burden for schools and intrude upon their personal choices. However, if one takes this line of reasoning, it becomes just one of many flimsy excuses that could be used to defy change. Incurring additional clerical work with regard to pushing more citizens to vote could not be considered an excessive burden in comparison to the benefits it will reap. Young people of the proper age need to feel proud to exercise their right to vote and a bit more through orientation on the importance of this right will aid in achievement of this goal. Voting allows citizens to wield real and immediate power; a manifestation of the citizens' power which needs to be honored - but only by those old enough to make an informed decision. Detractors of AB 183 must bear in mind that there is also a provision to the bill which would permit 18-year olds who object to the voter registration requirement to obtain a waiver and state their reasons for not registering and voting in their country's elections. Acceptable reasons include religious dictates or any specific and clearly defined hindrance. The bill is not burdensome in regards to its imposition on one's personal choice because voting is a necessary requirement for the democratic citizens of this country. The key is not to lower the voting age, but to give those who are old enough to make a mature decision regarding the running of their country a specific reason to do so. According to Dean, something must be done to either incentivize or penalize citizens to encourage them to place their votes and this is a valid option. Dean states that "voter turnout in the United States is just about as bad as it can get." The United States election process has been continually plagued by a low voter turnout with various reasons given by those who do not feel obligated to place their vote. Dean believes by making an individual's vote mandatory that the advantage of an increase in percentage of voters will outweigh the inherent problems with offering incentives for votes. In fact, the proposal of Jay Walljasper, in his 2004 Sacramento Bee article "Free Beer! Get out the Vote!", that those who do not vote be levied with an apathy tax is well worth considering. When one examines the results from various countries which instituted a mandatory voting law, it becomes clear that this method of assessing a penalty for not voting is quite effective in meeting its goal. For example, Australia recently enjoyed a 95% voter turnout at their last election. In light of other options the assessment of penalty may just be the incentive voters need to turn out at the polls. In summary, it is universally recognized that the United States is a country with one of the lowest percentages of citizens voting. Several solutions to this problem have been proposed, as well as the stance in support of keeping the status quo with the current system. While the electoral process is effective as is, citizens of a proper, mature age need to become more aware of the importance of voting and supporting their democratic government structure, it would only be beneficial to encourage them to exercise their right to vote through the institution of an apathy tax or something of the like. It is essential to instigate some sort of mandatory voting law in order to make citizens aware of their obligation, even if this law is not strictly enforced. Keeping the current system and not undermining the existing electoral process but raising awareness at the teenage level while imposing an incentive or penalty, will go far towards increasing voter turnout. Read More