This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: o cates o f co mpulso ry vo ting argue that decisio ns made by demo cratically
elected go vernments are mo re legitimate w hen higher pro po rtio ns o f the
po pulatio n participate. They argue further that vo ting, vo luntarily o r o therw ise,
has an educatio nal effect upo n the citiz ens. Po litical parties can derive financial
benefits fro m co mpulso ry vo ting, since they do no t have to spend reso urces
co nvincing the electo rate that it sho uld in general turn o ut to vo te. Lastly, if
demo cracy is go vernment by the peo ple, presumably this includes all peo ple, then
it is every citiz en's respo nsibility to elect their representatives.
The leading argument against co mpulso ry vo ting is that it is no t co nsistent w ith
the freedo m asso ciated w ith demo cracy. Vo ting is no t an intrinsic o bligatio n and
the enfo rcement o f the law w o uld be an infringement o f the citiz ens' freedo m
asso ciated w ith demo cratic electio ns. It may disco urage the po litical educatio n o f
the electo rate because peo ple fo rced to participate w ill react against the
perceived so urce o f o ppressio n. Is...
View Full Document
- Winter '14