This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: as pros aic as voting?” Thes e and other well-worn c ritic is ms have
more or les s s ettled the debate and s nuffed out any s erious public dis c us s ion about the c ons equenc es of mas s elec toral
dis engagement. The c ounterarguments , however, are not s o Orwellian. True elec tion reform would c reate a more
repres entative and democ ratic s y s tem for all of us .
Almos t any Americ an would agree that voting is c ritic al for the maintenanc e of a well-func tioning republic . Voting c onfers
legitimac y , whic h has been vital to Americ an elec ted offic ials s inc e the dawn of the nation. Mak ing voting c ompuls ory
s hould not be c ompared to more mundane prac tic es s uc h as government mandates on buy ing broc c oli bec aus e the latter
prac tic es are not c ritic al func tions of the s tate. For ex ample, there is a differenc e between a man who c laims a right to
not eat vegetables and one who c laims a “right to not pay tax es .” No one lik es pay ing tax es ; it is not voluntary bec aus e,
if it were, too few people would do it, and the government would not be able to func tion. Proponents of voluntary voting
c annot s quare the c irc le of how a duty s o c ritic al to the s urvival of our government s hould be left to whim.
Some argue that thos e who have no interes t in voting s hould not c as t ballots . If y ou do not c are...
View Full Document
This document was uploaded on 01/16/2014.
- Winter '14