Check No on Mandatory Voting

At a town hall style event in Cleveland, Ohio, President Obama suggested that America adopt a mandatory voting system similar to that of Australia and other nations. Obama mentioned that “it would be transformative if everybody voted – that would counteract money more than anything.” However, what Obama fails to mention is that one of the unintended consequences of a mandatory voting system with current restrictions on campaign finance will likely result in more money in politics rather than the opposite. Moreover, it would create a range of consequences resulting in an expansion of government power, and the violation of civil liberties.

First of all, voting is a right that allows us to show our support to candidates, their proposals, and other legislative issues. “Making voting mandatory means voting is no longer a right but an obligation.” Furthermore, choosing not to vote doesn’t express apathy, but sometimes demonstrates a form of protest against policies and politicians.

In regards to campaigning, a mandatory voting system will likely make the race cheaper only for incumbent politicians. After all, in a system which everyone is going to vote, how much would challengers likely need to spend to counter the natural advantages of incumbents? After all, incumbents have years of experience, and public coverage, that will force any challenger to dedicate more of their money and time to compete against them.

We have to also consider that Australia’s parliamentary system is wholly different from America’s governmental system. They have a proportional voting system, not a “winner takes all” system, and voters rank candidates by preference.

Furthermore, we have to also consider that since both parties work toward restricting third parties, mandatory voting will still result in two party dominated elections.

In consideration of these factors, the US must never consider adopting a mandatory voting system. Instead, we must look toward the source of the expansion of campaign financing in the past decades; which can be traced to the enormous size and responsibilities of the federal government. As a result, large donors respond with supporting candidates and proposals that they believe will benefit them, but ultimately hurt us all. Thus, the federal government must be reduced in size to decrease campaign financing, and create equal opportunities for all Americans. However, if everyone was required to vote, politicians would increase their promises of ambitious programs that would directly increase campaign spending and continue to hurt our prosperity.