Mandatory Voting in the United States?

[Antonio the Sixth]

I fully support mandatory voting everywhere.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I fully support mandatory voting everywhere.

What penalty do you propose for those who don't vote if it's mandatory?

You could get a moderate fine after the 2nd missed vote, gradually increasing as you miss more elections.

Of course, mandatory voting would also imply making voting much easier, through stuff like early voting, mail voting, universal registration, etc.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I fully support mandatory voting everywhere.

What penalty do you propose for those who don't vote if it's mandatory?

You could get a moderate fine after the 2nd missed vote, gradually increasing as you miss more elections.

Of course, mandatory voting would also imply making voting much easier, through stuff like early voting, mail voting, universal registration, etc.

It might be PC to say, Tony, but the poors (black and white) are the vast majority that don't vote.  So fine them?

That's a very valid concern.

Yes, I do have some moral qualms about fining people who can barely afford it (though obviously, in my ideal society, poor people would be better off than IRL even with such fines). That said, I assume most people wouldn't pay anything, since the possibility of being fined would be a sufficient incentive to go vote (I'd also support sending every first-time nonvoter a mail warning them of the consequences of subsequent abstentions).

And if someone doesn't know or care enough to vote despite it being easy and accessible, I doubt him doing so would benefit the political system.

I disagree with that. Anyone, regardless of their competence or interest in politics, should be able to express their voice in the democratic process. This is the very basis of democracy. We can certainly envision a system where only the politically engaged participate, but the problem is that these people would be unfit to represent the interest of the disenfranchised masses (precisely because political commitment is highly correlated with wealth and other forms of privilege). We need all the people to vote, because they all have a stake in policy and nobody can legitimately speak for another.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I don't understand why people think that the apathetic and the ignorant voting more often would help anything.  Oh, because they're more likely to vote for your guy?  Think about that for a mintute.

Because they all have a stake in the election's outcome.

Yes, sometimes people ought be helped against their own will. I find it baffling that this statement is even controversial.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I disagree with that. Anyone, regardless of their competence or interest in politics, should be able to express their voice in the democratic process.

Although I agree with this in principle, I don't think it's very realistic. A large number of people literally know nothing about parties, candidates, ideologies or policies.

Those people exist, but I don't think they come close to making up the majority of nonvoters. Most of them know very well which party they would vote for if they bothered to (whether they would do so for the right reasons or not is another debate), but they are convinced their vote doesn't matter.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I disagree with that. Anyone, regardless of their competence or interest in politics, should be able to express their voice in the democratic process.

Although I agree with this in principle, I don't think it's very realistic. A large number of people literally know nothing about parties, candidates, ideologies or policies.

Those people exist, but I don't think they come close to making up the majority of nonvoters. Most of them know very well which party they would vote for if they bothered to (whether they would do so for the right reasons or not is another debate), but they are convinced their vote doesn't matter.

Many people who vote know essentially nothing about politics either.

Indeed, that's my point.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I disagree with that. Anyone, regardless of their competence or interest in politics, should be able to express their voice in the democratic process.

Although I agree with this in principle, I don't think it's very realistic. A large number of people literally know nothing about parties, candidates, ideologies or policies.

Those people exist, but I don't think they come close to making up the majority of nonvoters. Most of them know very well which party they would vote for if they bothered to (whether they would do so for the right reasons or not is another debate), but they are convinced their vote doesn't matter.

Many people who vote know essentially nothing about politics either.

Indeed, that's my point.

What makes you think that would change other than idealism?

I never said that would change. You're still missing the point.

Yes. Many people who vote are and will be ridiculously misinformed. They still should be able to express their ridiculously misinformed choices.

[Antonio the Sixth]

They still should be able to express their ridiculously misinformed choices.

I think you're arguing for mandatory voting? So you don't want them to be able to vote, you want them to be obligated to vote.

And what if their ridiculously misinformed choice amounts to them voting for "Newt Gingrich" because Newt sounds like a cool name?

I don't really get what is gained by having that opinion expressed?

But this kind of misinformed vote is marginal. Most "misinformed voters" more or less vote based on some kind of issues, even though they don't really grasp the specifics of these issues. In short, they do have opinions on stuff, and if we are a true democracy, their opinions should be taken into account regardless of what we think of them.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Some think that the U.S. should impose a civics literacy test to test voters' intelligence on history issues.

Yay, great idea! Who cares about democracy anyways?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Why stop there?  If the goal is to make sure even participates in the political process whether they like it or not, how about mandating everyone has to run for office?

I'd have nothing against this, if it wasn't so impractical (endless ballots, tons of paperwork, etc)

[Antonio the Sixth]

Why stop there?  If the goal is to make sure even participates in the political process whether they like it or not, how about mandating everyone has to run for office?

I'd have nothing against this, if it wasn't so impractical (endless ballots, tons of paperwork, etc)

Would you also force them to accept the office if they win?

Nah, since there's no way to ensure they'd effectively perform their office. Still, since it's effectively impossible to win without campaigning, this wouldn't happen.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Why stop there?  If the goal is to make sure even participates in the political process whether they like it or not, how about mandating everyone has to run for office?

I'd have nothing against this, if it wasn't so impractical (endless ballots, tons of paperwork, etc)

Would you also force them to accept the office if they win?

Nah, since there's no way to ensure they'd effectively perform their office. Still, since it's effectively impossible to win without campaigning, this wouldn't happen.

So what's the point then? I understand you said it's not practical. This is obviously true, but I don't see what's preferable about it in theory either.

I've no idea why we're even discussing this. I just said I'd have nothing against it, I didn't say it would be an awesome thing or whatever.