4 ms·

If you want more people to vote, then just pass a law that mandates all citizens have to vote. That's how it is done in Belgium. Think of it. If your choice i

If you want more people to vote, then just pass a law that mandates all citizens have to vote. That's how it is done in Belgium. Think of it. If your choice is ether vote or risk a fine, you'd rather go and vote. If you go and vote, you'll learn at least a bit about the choices you have to make in the ballot. P.S. While Belgium got mandatory voting right, it completely messed up electronic voting. I remember being an assessor in a polling station with electronic voting. People voted, then the head of the voting station took 3 1⁄2-inch floppy disks out of the machine, put them in an envelope and drove away to the district polling committee. There was not counting, no protocol to sign. Nothing. I was appalled.

godelski 6y ago
> If your choice is ether vote or risk a fine This is ABSOLUTELY not what I want. I for one want voting to be extremely accessible. Everyone that wants to vote can. The goal isn't to make everyone vote but rather that everyone has the ability to vote. That you don't have to take time off to vote. That it is easy. Universally accessible, not universally mandated.
- madeofpalk 6y ago
  What happens though is that once you make voting compulsory, you have to make voting as easy as possible.
  - true_religion 6y ago
    You could simply mandate that voting be done on a federal holiday. That won't help everyone, but it will help most people who are trying to vote physically.
    - madeofpalk 6y ago
      Australia, which has mandatory voting, also mandates that voting is on a weekend.
      - sam_lowry_ 6y ago
        Same for Belgium. Voting is always on Sunday.
- xeromal 6y ago
  What's wrong with mandated voting?
  - foxrider 6y ago
    People who has no business voting voting. Imagine how many people would vote - not from the informed voter perspective. They'll most likely vote for the candidate they remember in a positive light. Imagine how much more sway would a big ad campaign have. I would be ok if a blank ballot would be the least effort option with no strings attached, but with a "wasting your vote" being a stigma and a part of the culture I see no need in any mandate. I just really don't want people who can't be bothered to go to a polling station on a holiday specifically made for voting to caste their vote to vote at all. Some times gatekeeping certain things is ok. There must be a balance.
    - filleduchaos 6y ago
      Apart from literal children (and felons in the US, I suppose), there is no such thing as a citizen who "has no business voting". That's the pesky thing about democracy, you see. If you want "informed voters" then you actually have to work to have an informed populace, not gripe about people's right to participate in the society they're a part of.
      - remarkEon 6y ago
        There’s no such thing as an informed populous. There never has been, and never will be. There was never a “golden age” of democracy, where everyone dutifully read their newspaper every morning that was filled with articles written by unbiased and objective journalists. It’s always been a shit show. Having some reasonable and well understood requirements for who does get to vote within a jurisdiction is a means to ensure that those who do are doing so with care. Perhaps that’s naive. But it’s no more naive than thinking “democracy”, broadly defined, would improve if we had 100% voter participation.
        filleduchaos 6y ago
- aneutron 6y ago
  If you go by the American-style "absolute freedom" mantra, I get where you're coming from. On the other hand, casting a vote doesn't mean CHOOSING a candidate. It means that you can cast a BLANK vote. And that, in and of itself is an extremely important thing. It shows that you are NOT okay with either candidates, and forces them to actually adjust their agendas to suit the "public will", instead of falling back to what I believe is commonly called in the US as "ratfucking", aggressive districting, and voter disenfranchisement, which means they literally only care about getting enough voters to pass. As for the doability, it's already done in Australia. Pretty successful, and basically and national holiday celebrated like 4th of july in the US.
  - godelski 6y ago
    The problem you are presenting is about protest voting and VSE. There are much better ways to address that problem, such as cardinal styles of voting like Approval and STAR. These also have other properties that help. I am perfectly okay with a "none of the above" option available as well.
- ZeroGravitas 6y ago
  If you dont mandate it, then people can be subtly disenfranchised and then blamed for it.
rustybelt 6y ago
Yep, and let people vote for a longer period of time. Having a voting week or month instead of a day.
- sam_lowry_ 6y ago
  Nope, spanning voting over several days makes it easy to hack the electoral process. In Belarus, they voted for 5 days and people are out in the streets for 5 weeks to reclaim their votes. Today is the last of three voting days in Rissia, and it looks like the results will be totally made up.

godelski 6y ago

> If your choice is ether vote or risk a fine This is ABSOLUTELY not what I want. I for one want voting to be extremely accessible. Everyone that wants to vote can. The goal isn't to make everyone vote but rather that everyone has the ability to vote. That you don't have to take time off to vote. That it is easy. Universally accessible, not universally mandated.

madeofpalk 6y ago
What happens though is that once you make voting compulsory, you have to make voting as easy as possible.
- true_religion 6y ago
  You could simply mandate that voting be done on a federal holiday. That won't help everyone, but it will help most people who are trying to vote physically.
  - madeofpalk 6y ago
    Australia, which has mandatory voting, also mandates that voting is on a weekend.
    - sam_lowry_ 6y ago
      Same for Belgium. Voting is always on Sunday.
xeromal 6y ago
What's wrong with mandated voting?
- foxrider 6y ago
  People who has no business voting voting. Imagine how many people would vote - not from the informed voter perspective. They'll most likely vote for the candidate they remember in a positive light. Imagine how much more sway would a big ad campaign have. I would be ok if a blank ballot would be the least effort option with no strings attached, but with a "wasting your vote" being a stigma and a part of the culture I see no need in any mandate. I just really don't want people who can't be bothered to go to a polling station on a holiday specifically made for voting to caste their vote to vote at all. Some times gatekeeping certain things is ok. There must be a balance.
  - filleduchaos 6y ago
    Apart from literal children (and felons in the US, I suppose), there is no such thing as a citizen who "has no business voting". That's the pesky thing about democracy, you see. If you want "informed voters" then you actually have to work to have an informed populace, not gripe about people's right to participate in the society they're a part of.
    - remarkEon 6y ago
      There’s no such thing as an informed populous. There never has been, and never will be. There was never a “golden age” of democracy, where everyone dutifully read their newspaper every morning that was filled with articles written by unbiased and objective journalists. It’s always been a shit show. Having some reasonable and well understood requirements for who does get to vote within a jurisdiction is a means to ensure that those who do are doing so with care. Perhaps that’s naive. But it’s no more naive than thinking “democracy”, broadly defined, would improve if we had 100% voter participation.
      - filleduchaos 6y ago
aneutron 6y ago
If you go by the American-style "absolute freedom" mantra, I get where you're coming from. On the other hand, casting a vote doesn't mean CHOOSING a candidate. It means that you can cast a BLANK vote. And that, in and of itself is an extremely important thing. It shows that you are NOT okay with either candidates, and forces them to actually adjust their agendas to suit the "public will", instead of falling back to what I believe is commonly called in the US as "ratfucking", aggressive districting, and voter disenfranchisement, which means they literally only care about getting enough voters to pass. As for the doability, it's already done in Australia. Pretty successful, and basically and national holiday celebrated like 4th of july in the US.
- godelski 6y ago
  The problem you are presenting is about protest voting and VSE. There are much better ways to address that problem, such as cardinal styles of voting like Approval and STAR. These also have other properties that help. I am perfectly okay with a "none of the above" option available as well.
ZeroGravitas 6y ago
If you dont mandate it, then people can be subtly disenfranchised and then blamed for it.

rustybelt 6y ago

Yep, and let people vote for a longer period of time. Having a voting week or month instead of a day.

sam_lowry_ 6y ago
Nope, spanning voting over several days makes it easy to hack the electoral process. In Belarus, they voted for 5 days and people are out in the streets for 5 weeks to reclaim their votes. Today is the last of three voting days in Rissia, and it looks like the results will be totally made up.