Compulsory voting means ignoring Election Day is not an option

Seattle Post Intelligencer ^ | Wednesday, November 24, 2004 | GREG BARNS

[CherylBower]

How 'bout not just paid taxes, but you get the same number of votes as the tax dollars you pay in, maybe with a max of 10. Every 1,000 or so dollars is a vote.

[hellinahandcart]

How is compulsory voting taking away a freedom?

Telling me I MUST do something is taking away my freedom to CHOOSE.

If you can command me under threat of penalty to "exercise a right", it's no longer a right. Is it?

It's compulsory that you be 16 before you get a license to drive, it's compulsory that you pay bills, any number of things that do not take away freedom.

LOL. You're still in high school or early on in college, aren't you? Even so, you have no excuse for not being able to tell the difference between rights, privileges, and contractual obligations. And what the government of a free people can and can NOT do.

[freeparella]

Do you propose to sanction these folks who have embraced not voting for centuries?

I was unaware of that. Obviously if we were to adopt compulsory voting we would have to tweak it for America. I'm not a policy person, so I don't know what that tweaking would entail.

[End Times Sentinel]

Not for nothin' but this thread looks like a super place for me to argue that Judges should make laws.

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

[hellinahandcart]

We have an Electoral College partly because they didn't want stupid people, i.e., the ignorant masses voting on their own.

Wrong again. The Electoral College was firmly in place long before the "ignorant masses" were voting.

We have an Electoral College because states, not people, elect the president.

[hellinahandcart]

LOL. Yes, so many problems are solved by judges who cut to the chase and seize the day!

[society-by-contract]

Here are a few links to the Mennonite position on not voting, because they view it as interfering with their duty to christ:

http://www.mennoweekly.org/MARCH/03-22-04/VOTE03-22.html

http://www.thirdway.com/wv/article.asp?ID=330

http://www.thirdway.com/menno/glossary.asp?ID=93

Please consider the idea that some folks view electoral voting as immoral before advocating using the coercive apparatus of the state to compel them to violate their consciences.

[society-by-contract]

feel
I agree that feelings are personal and subjective. This word has become a substitute for thought for many folks. Don't think, just feel and emote---YUCK!

[Tacis]

Compulsory voting would require fines for failure to vote. That would require an almost perfect system of registration. Voters would have to register, therefore, and provide identifcation to ensure they it is, indeed the registered person who is voting and avoiding a penalty. In the US, left-wing, neocommunist democrat crapweasels would oppose compulsory voting because it would make it much more difficult (and therefore, more expensive for the dems) for Jamaicans, Haitians, Cubans and Mexicans and the dead to vote and for all of them and live Americans to vote multple times.

[charleywhiskey]

As I recall, voting was also compulsory in the Soviet Union.

[tjwmason]

If 'none of the above' is not an option, compulsory voting would probably be unconstitutional.

The tradition over here is to 'spoil one's ballot paper'. This sends a signal that one has the sense and inclination to vote, but does not wish to support any of the candidates standing. As a party counting observer I once saw a ballot paper on which was written 'I vote for Manchester United' (a football team).

Forcing somebody to vote for a candidate is utterly wrong. That said, I would still oppose compulsary voting - in the sense of having to attend a polling station.

[tjwmason]

would require an almost perfect system of registration. Voters would have to register, therefore, and provide identifcation to ensure they it is, indeed the registered person who is voting and avoiding a penalty.

During the recent election campaign I got the impression that American voter registration requires pro-action on the part of the voter; it is the other way around here in Britain, the local authority (which compiles the electoral register) writes to each address in the early autumn with a simple form to register those living there. Thus it is reactive on the part of the voter. It's not perfect, but works well-enough as we don't have the effect of anarcho-leftist Rat party activists - thankfully.

[Red Boots]

If voting were compulsory apathy would no longer be an option.

What's wrong with apathy ?

While it's not my choice in politics, it seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate response in many circumstances.

It would be tyranny for anyone else to decide for me whether or not I should care about voting.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

What's wrong with apathy ?

I could explain it to you...but I just don't care.

[HenryLeeII]

Not for nothin' but this thread looks like a super place for me to argue that Judges should make laws.

Exactly! Without having to kow-tow to the whims of ignorant voters, judges are able to make laws that we and our elected representatives just don't have the intelligence or courage to make. How else will we be a truly progressive society and catch up to Sweden and the other enlightened European countries?