A Case for Compulsory Voting?

A simplistic response on my part, Democracy is all about the right to choose, if people choose not to vote then that's their right.

Besides if people were forced to vote how many spoilt ballot papers would there be?

Regards
Clive

If voting was compulsory there should be a "None of the Above" box.

Regards
Steve M

quote:

Originally posted by 7V:
If voting was compulsory there should be a "None of the Above" box.

Regards
Steve M

Yes, I agree. I think I'd probably tick it - might vote UKIP I suppose.

I don't like the idea of some toss-pot politician prosecuting me for not voting for them - they're all...well, tossers, basically. Haven't got any respect for ANY of the current lot. Especially that grinning tosser.

EW

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:
I would use my democratic right to vote Monster Raving Loony.

At least they admit they are taking the piss.

My first ever legal vote, in 1997, was for Monster Raving Loony. Fark voting Labour!

I think that voting should be compulsory.

Abstention should be a conscious process, not an apathetic one. I would have no problem at all with someone wishing to abstain who does so by spoiling a ballot paper. I do have a problem with people not exercising their democratic right because they can't be arsed.

Compulsory voting would make some at least pay a little more attention to the debates knowing that a vote must be cast - if you have to go and vote you may as well express an opinion.

The only argument against this is that it may well be wrong to force people to vote where so many votes go down the tiolet due to our first past the post electoral system. We should therefore bring in some form of PR first, before then making voting compulsory.

Kevin

quote:

Originally posted by kevj:
The only argument against this is that it may well be wrong to force people to vote where so many votes go down the tiolet due to our first past the post electoral system. We should therefore bring in some form of PR first, before then making voting compulsory.

Ok if I disagree on this one?

There are few PR systems that impress me as working particularly well. 'First past the post' isn't a perfect system but I prefer it to PR. I don't like the wheeling and dealing that usually goes on after a PR election and the disproportionate power that minority and extremist parties can sometimes wield.

However, I do feel that our current system should be made fairer. In particular, the boundary definitions need to be updated to reflect the current demographic situation.

Best regards
Steve M

Steve,

Of course it's OK to disagree.....that's what a debate is.

PR isn't perfect, and I haven't spent enough time looking at the alternative systems to know which I believe should be employed. I can't believe though that it's impossible to come up with something which doesn't result in minority parties having a disproportionate amount of power.

I take your point on the current system being made fairer too - I'm led to believe that the Tories would need to have a 7 or 8% lead in the popular vote to get any sort of majority at all where a similar Labour lead gives rise to the sort of majorites that we see today.

But it remains the case that none of thumping great majorities we've seen since 1979 have been obtained with a majority of the popular vote - isn't his just another case of (somewaht bigger admittedly) minorites wielding disproportonate amounts of power?

Voting (preferably not for a 'Party', but for an individual constituency representative) should be compulsory, as e.g. should:

Not cycling on pavements (unless you're a little child).
Not depositing litter/fag-ends/chewing-gum etc all over community.
Behaving nicely to each other.
Switching off your equipment when not using it.
Cameras at expensive football matches to monitor whether whole of ball crosses line.
Sharing out money/trophies in football/life etc.
Etcetera.

quote:

Compulsory voting would make some at least pay a little more attention to the debates knowing that a vote must be cast

This is naïve; a lot of people that do vote do not give a damn about policies. They vote for the politicians that come over well on tele, or there parents, spouses, friends vote for or lots of other reasons not to do directly with politics. At least with the current “vote if you can be bothered” system that is what you get, people voting who are bothered (mostly)
If an individual votes, he or she is legitimising the act of voting in a democracy, and by definition accepts the system and has to accept the outcome, this should not be mandatory.

Should keeping manifesto commitments be compulsory????
John.

quote:

Switching off your equipment when not using it.

Not many votes from Naim owners for that one

quote:

Originally posted by John K R:
This is naïve; a lot of people that do vote do not give a damn about policies. They vote for the politicians that come over well on tele, or there parents, spouses, friends vote for or lots of other reasons not to do directly with politics. At least with the current “vote if you can be bothered” system that is what you get, people voting who are bothered (mostly).

This doesn't change the argument - because you/I may not approve of the way in which someone has come to a decision about who to vote for doesn't mean that that vote is less valid.

My point is that in a "vote if you can be bothered" system then, as in this election, 25% of all eligible to vote ended up giving Labour a perfectly good working majority of over 60.

quote:

because you/I may not approve of the way in which someone has come to a decision about who to vote for doesn't mean that that vote is less valid.

True, the point I was trying to make is I don’t think that forcing people to vote will prompt them to “pay a little more attention to the debates knowing that a vote must be cast” I don’t think you can enforce an interest by legislation.

quote:

25% of all eligible to vote ended up giving Labour a perfectly good working majority of over 60.

Believe me if this result could have been averted by compulsory voting I may by swayed, but I cant see how the proportions would alter, unless some study has shown that folk who decline to vote (if forced) would vote against Labour.
FWIW I did try to stimulate some apathetic work colleges into an interest, and to vote with success, though they could be lying to shut me up,
John.

You make some incredibly presumptous statements there old bean if I may say so. If all who are entitled to vote, do so, compulsorily or not, their choice (fully inclusive of spoiling a paper as they're all wankers² too) are to my mind as valid as if they fall for some old party line patter, and actually choose an entity, your whole ethos is wrong and arrogant, if you're not taking the piss that is, and then it could indirectly be well out of you yourself, innit ?


Fritz Von Never Assume other peoples thoughts

quote:

Never Assume other peoples thoughts

Fitz, I am not doing. what I have stated is not what I have asumed but what people have told me, such as "I am voting for who my husband tells me to" and I am not taking the piss or kidding and it is not a one off either,
John.

If all the disaffected (non) voters were forced to turn up and vote and they all cast a (non) vote to the Raving Loony Party, who do you think would be elected?

I agree that it should be compulsory to turn up at the polling station but there should be a box entitled:

I do not wish to vote

Steve me old Mucker, you are right; there should be such a section, but it should be on the ballot paper to ensure just the same privacy and anonimity that's (supposedly) afforded to all voters in the UK, innit.

Fritz Von Obvious innit Tom

Though when I look again, I think that's what you probably mean anyway innit mate ?

Steve,

I wouldn't have any problem with a "I do not wish to vote" or even a "None of the above" box. The only problem then is how to deal with a majority for "None of the above"