Should America Make Voting Compulsory? – Free-Rider Problem and U.S. Democratic Government

Can the government of a polity characterized by low levels of political participation truly work? This question appears to be particularly important in the aftermath of the 2016 Presidential election in the United States. According to a recent poll conducted by Gallup, Americans’ satisfaction with the way things are going in the U.S. has fallen to 21%, the lowest point since July 2016 (Brennan 2017). Concurrently, the discontent of American citizens with the performance of Donald Trump is also on the increase. Trump has consistently had much lower approval ratings than any elected president in his first year, and his approval rating has steadily declined from the first through his third quarter in office (Gallup 2017b). At the same time, we ought to bear in mind that the incumbent president triumphed in a low-turnout election. Only about 56.9 percent of the voting-eligible population cast a ballot on November 8, 2016. This means that more than 4 out of 10 Americans who had the privilege of being able to make a decision about the political future of the U.S. simply didn’t, and just a little more than a quarter of the voting-eligible population chose the next president (Lopez 2016). This state of the matter begs a question, Would satisfaction with the performance of the president and the overall direction in which the U.S. be higher if more people decided to express their preferences on the election day? Is it a responsibility of the government to ensure higher levels of political participation?

I believe that the answer to the two questions above is yes!, and that this is the time for the United States to adopt compulsory voting. We should understand that liberal democracy constitutes a good example of a public good – it is (at least in principle) non-excludable, as all citizens of a polity have access to the benefits the regime offers, and also non-rivalrous, since if one citizen enjoys the full extent of rights guaranteed to them purely by virtue of being a U.S. national, nobody’s ability to participate in and benefit from democracy is affected. Yet, like any public good, liberal democracy is subject to a free-rider problem. Whether a citizen incurs the costs of voting – such as time spent traveling to polls and waiting in line, information costs of choosing whom to vote for – does not affect their ability to seize advantages of living in a free, democratic society (Harvard Law Review 2007, 591-2). Compulsory voting is not only a legitimate mechanism for increasing the legitimacy of democratic government, but also an effective way of instilling a sense of shared responsibility for the polity into the political culture of the United States. This is an important issue. A review of scholarly literature supports the claim that political participation is highly correlated with governance effectiveness. For instance, in his 2006 study Martin Nekola argued that political participation is a key cornerstone of good governance in harmonizing the activities of the state, private and public (non-profit) sectors, allowing markets to flourish and people to live healthier and happier lives (Nekola 2006, 394).

Compulsory voting could also ensure a broader, more representative sample of voters in American elections. As observed by Lisa Hill, a professor of politics at the University of Adelaide, “Failure to vote is concentrated among groups already experiencing one or more forms of deprivation, namely, the poor, the unemployed, the homeless, indigenous peoples, the isolated, new citizens and the young” (Hill 2011). Prof. Hill hails from Australia, a country similar to the United States in that it is also a multiethnic polity with an Anglo-Saxon heritage. Adoption of compulsory voting by Canberra in 1924 proved to be an effective response not only to plummeting turnout (evidenced by the 1922 election in particular), but also to ensuring a more representative and legitimate government. An expansion of the requirement to Aboriginal Australians in 1984 only perpetuated this positive trend. And phasing out the requirement to vote can yield the exactly opposite effects. As explained by Aly Waleed, this was demonstrated by the Netherlands, which abandoned compulsory voting in 1970: “The result was not merely a fall in turnout, but a disproportionate decline in the turnout of socially and economically marginalized groups” (Aly 2017).

It is interesting to observe that the idea of compulsory voting has been recently considered by high-profile policymakers in Washington. President Barack Obama was a proponent of making voting mandatory, expressing a view similar to Prof. Hill. “The people who tend not to vote are young, they’re lower income, they’re skewed more heavily towards immigrant groups and minority groups,” Obama said in 2015. “There’s a reason why some folks try to keep them away from the polls” (Yan 2015). President Obama was certainly aware that the U.S. faces some of the lowest turnout rates in the developed world.

Opponents of compulsory voting could argue that it is “Un-American,” as it forces citizens to express their preferences and limits their “liberty” to refuse participation in the political process. If we consider casting a ballot to be a form of “voicing” one’s opinion, could compulsory voting be deemed unconstitutional and a violation of the First Amendment? I believe this is not the case. Membership in a democratic polity brings about not only benefits, but also obligations. In a similar way, voting is not merely a privilege, but also a civic duty. Participatory effort is required to perpetuate a democratic regime, even if it means that autonomy of individuals has to be somehow limited. At the end of the day, would compulsory voting differ from other obligations imposed on citizens, such as mandatory taxation, jury duty and the requirement to vaccinate our children?

Works cited:

Aly, Waleed. 2017. “Voting Should Be Mandatory,” New York Times, January 19. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/opinion/voting-should-be-mandatory.html?_r=0

Brennan, Megan. 2017. “Dissatisfaction with Government, Direction of U.S. Persists,” Gallup News, October 19. http://news.gallup.com/poll/220703/dissatisfaction-government-direction-persist.aspx?g_source=POLITICS&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

Harvard Law Review. 2007. “The Case for Compulsory Voting in the United States,” Harvard Law Review 121 (2): 591-612.

Hill, Lisa. 2011. “What We’ve Seen in Australia With Mandatory Voting,” New York Times, November 7. https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/11/07/should-voting-in-the-us-be-mandatory-14/what-weve-seen-in-australia-with-mandatory-voting

Jones, Jeffrey M. 2017. “Trump Job Approval Slips to 36.9% in His Third Quarter,” Gallup News, October 20. http://news.gallup.com/poll/220742/trump-job-approval-slipped-third-quarter.aspx?g_source=POLITICS&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

Lopez, German. 2016. “Trump Was Elected by a Little More than a Quarter of Eligible Voters,” Vox, November 10. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/10/13587462/trump-election-2016-voter-turnout

Nekola, Martin. 2006. “Political Participation and Governance Effectiveness: Does Participation Matter?,” In Democratic Governance in CEE Countries: Challenges and Responses for the XXI Century, edited by Alan Rosenbaum and Juraj Nemec, 393-406. Bratislava, Slovakia: NISPACee.

Yan, Holly. 2015. “Obama: “Maybe It’s Time for Mandatory Voting”,” CNN, March 19. http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/19/politics/obama-mandatory-voting/

7 Responses to "Should America Make Voting Compulsory? – Free-Rider Problem and U.S. Democratic Government"

Jackson Puckey says:

November 5, 2017 at 5:03 pm

While compulsory voting certainly forces some degree of civic involvement, brings forth a greater sense of investment in the political process, and ensures full representation, there are some serious issues with the proposal which must be addressed if it were ever to be put into place. Firstly, many people use their lack of participation as a means to protest the system. As this argument isn’t necessarily the best reason to stop compulsory voting, many states have added “None of the Above” options to their ballots so those who wish to protest the system may do so. Another argument against compulsory voting lies in the name itself: how do you make voting compulsory? If a fine is instituted, as has been done in many countries, this can easily be construed as a tax on the uninformed and, in many cases, the poor, who do not have the time to either learn about the candidates or actually go to a polling place. As US elections are held on Tuesday, many people have to vote in the hour polling places are open before work or in the two hours in which they are open after work. While this time question could be resolved by holding the election over several days or over a weekend, there is still one final issue. Compulsory voting relies on a populace that is either highly educated on the issues of the day and where the candidates stand or a populace that is easily manipulated by the little they know about a candidate. Voter information in the United States is already dangerously low for those who DO chose to vote. If we force the uninformed to vote, they will most likely chose a candidate based on their own, limited information. Overcoming this problem will be much harder than any of the others and it will require many solutions. Civics education in schools simply must be better, but even this will not inform all citizens. Compulsory voting certainly sounds like a solution to our government’s turnout and legitimacy problem, but getting there will require a great deal of action.
Lotte Elfering says:

November 5, 2017 at 7:55 pm

While I find this an interesting concept that would definitely increase voter turnout, I do not believe this is the right way to go about this. When I first came here, I could not believe that for a country where everything seems to be so politicized, the United States had such a low voter turnout. I would think that if many issues are so important to people, and they connect them to specific political parties – like health care or gun control – they would be more likely to vote to express their preferences. However, many do not do this, and I will go over several reasons why I think they do not do this, and how they will be more likely to do so without making voting as a whole compulsory.

One reason why people do not vote might be because of their severely restricted choices. In the United States, realistically only the Democratic or the Republican party can be in power at this time. If there are people that do not believe their beliefs line up with either of these parties, they might be less incentivized to vote simply because they believe their voice cannot be represented in government. This can be prevented by allowing more parties to participate and creating a more accessible political landscape, however this option is very ambitious and seems to be impossible to execute.

An easier way to increase voter turnout is to make voting more accessible and socialize people into voting, as Jackson also suggested. If voting becomes more normal, as we discussed in class, people are more likely to do so and to stop considering it a burden on their time and resources. If one were to assist young people when they vote for the first time, by for example going with them to the voting places or organizing polling stations on college campuses and high schools, this would already increase turnout among this low-turnout group. The same could be done for poorer people, who also have a lower turnout rate, by increasing polling places close to their homes, implementing programs to bring them to the polls and to talk to them about the importance of voting. These measures should not involve too much effort on the part of the government, and might increase turnout significantly.
Austin Liptrot says:

November 5, 2017 at 8:06 pm

While there are some benefits to compulsory voting as you pointed out in your blog, as a whole forcing people to vote is a bad idea. The founding fathers believed they possessed a certain intellectual enlightenment that only a few had. For this reason, they personally thought themselves to be the most qualified to create our democracy. A glaring issue is that a portion of the electorate do not have the education, or the interest to learn thoroughly about the elections that they would be forced to vote for. This could lead to unfavorable policy changes. The privilege to vote cannot be imposed upon the uninterested. While participation would certainly increase, the benefits to the nation as a whole would not. We cannot accurately predict the effects of this change upon our democracy. Perhaps this change would lead to a systematic commercial campaigning to reel in the easy votes of the uninterested. Perhaps this could lead to further forced participation and a restriction of our liberties. Compulsory voting is not currently the solution to low levels of participation
Daniel Bonaventura says:

November 5, 2017 at 9:48 pm

Although I agree that a higher voting turnout could benefit our country by increasing the effectiveness of government and increasing the voice of the lower classes in policy making, I do not believe that compulsory voting is the proper solution. The founders created a country that was to be based on equality of opportunity not equality of condition. In the past 100 years America has made great strides to increase the equality of opportunity in voting. This has been done through several amendments and policy changes that has opened up this privilege to women, minority groups, lower-class citizens, and young adults, all of whose voices deserve to be heard. Through this our country has been able to better reflect the views of all citizens. However to make voting compulsory would be to create the opportunity of condition in participation. This is not necessarily a bad thing, yet it contradicts a strong american value. If people are given the same opportunity to vote, it should be of their own interest and effort to do so. In addition people should have the freedom to exercise their right to not vote as well. As Lotte brings up in a comment above, not everyone supports the views of the Republican or Democratic parties, the only parties that hold relevance from an electorate standpoint. Many people may not even find an other party they support enough to justify voting for. For this reason it would be both a burden and an infringement of their rights to be forced to support a party such as in monarchistic political systems where citizens are forced to support the party in power.

That being said I do not believe that we have reached equality of opportunity in voting yet. This is still a problem that must continue to be addressed going forward. As a country we must prioritize making sure that all citizens have the equal opportunity to vote and not whether or not they make it to the polls.
Jackson Krase says:

November 8, 2017 at 8:57 pm

Unlike the rest of the comments made on this blog post, I concur with you that compulsory voting should be implemented within the United States in order to better represent the population in matters of significance. Furthermore, I strongly agree with your statement that “Membership in a democratic polity brings about not only benefits, but also obligations.” It is from this that I see the implementation of compulsory voting to be a safeguard from a minority population making decisions that will ultimately affect the entire population as a whole. Obviously, in order for this policy to be most effective, there will need to be a governmental focus on decreasing barriers to voting. Compulsory voting will be benefitted by a decrease in the rigidness of voter registration restrictions and reducing limits on early voting as people will have increased access to the polls. However, in its basic form, compulsory voting is a promising solution to many of the problems that plague our election system.
One of the most underreported effects of compulsory voting is that it dramatically alters who runs for political office as well as the policy proposals being discussed and submitted. The implementation of mandatory voting will essentially move political parties and their policies more towards the center of the political spectrum, pushing extremist groups to an, even more, far-away fringe. Thus, this manner of voting protects against the rise of demagogues in the political arena and promotes sensible and rational policy proposals.
It is no secret that turnout during elections in the United States greatly lags behind other Western nations. According to data from a Pew research poll, only 55.7% of the U.S. voting-age population cast ballots in the 2016 presidential election. This is not only shocking but despairing. In a country where civic duty is enforced through a variety of means such as taxes and mandatory jury service, voting should be considered both a right and an obligation.
In addition, those who argue that compulsory voting is un-American and that it violates free speech and one’s right to silence have to take into account that compulsory voting does not force you to vote for a specific candidate. All that is required is that one shows up to the polls. Therefore, I see mandating voting in the polity to be a strategic solution to low levels of representativeness in American elections and one of the most effective ways to ensure safeguards on our representative democracy.
Alice Depasse says:

November 14, 2017 at 11:34 pm

The issue of having mandatory voting is not necessarily a matter of being un -American, but having a large portion of people voting simply because they have to, and therefore not making an informed decision. However, I agree that there is a problem in that it is often a specific demographic that is less likely to vote.
Perhaps a potential solution could be to find ways to reduce the “cost” of voting. Often people are unable to vote because of work, or the difficulty in traveling to the appropriate locations. If voting days became national holidays, that could give people with strict jobs the ability to partake in elections, and that would lower the cost for certain individuals. Another potential partial solution would be have additional transportation available on days of election from more remote locations, to help lessen the difficulty of commuting. I feel that there must be many small things that could improve voter turn out, without necessarily making it mandatory. It is simply a matter of lowering the “cost” to individuals.
I also think that it is important to stress that people vote with knowledge of policy in mind and not simply for the candidate their parents/friends are voting for. Therefore, maybe their could be a free information session before voting that is not mandatory but to explain the most important policies of each candidate with simple facts. This may not be a practical option but maybe it is worth considering.
Declan Horrigan says:

December 8, 2017 at 6:01 pm

I think the idea of compulsory voting is a very intriguing one. I believe that there are many implications that this would have, both positive and negative. I do agree with you in the sense that the incredibly low turnout American elections has is a problem, especially when the satisfaction ratings of the elected president are so low. We, as Americans, are lucky enough to live in a democratic nation where we can have a direct say as to who our leader will be. This is not a common privilege that people all over the world have. It is astounding to me that so many Americans take this for granted and waste their ability to voice there opinions. What surprises me even more is that many people who did not vote, after the results of the election, are unhappy with the result and wish the other candidate had one. People should have no right to complain about who is in office if they did not do their civic duty and vote.

Comments are closed.