Voting differences...

So we're in the middle of an election campaign here. Actually, today is election day. Yes, it's Thursday. There's at least a few schools closed of that we know of, to act as polling places. Out for a jog this morning, I saw at least 2 others, along with a number of things that really pushed home to me the differences between elections here, and back home

First of all, Wikipedia lists a total of 10 countries that belong to the OECD and where voting is compulsory. The OECD is roughly described as a list of developed, high-income countries.

So the first thing I've noticed, is voting is NOT compulsory here. Nor is it in the US, but we knew that already. The next thing I noticed is, vote day is on a Weekday. I'm not sure if it always is, but it sure is this year. That means, people who are registered, have to take time out from work, or their day, to actively go and vote. That in turn means, those people who are voting, are doing it, because they want to. Most everyone I know at home, votes (or turns up to vote) because they have to.

So point one is, voters here vote because they want to, because they feel it is important.

The next thing I've noticed is involvement. You know those scenes you see in the US, where every lawn in every street has a campaign poster out the front? I'm voting for so-and-so. This is a so-and-so residence, etc? Well, that stuff happens here too. I've seen countless "Lib Dems for Brent" and so forth signs. In Windows, on front yards. There's also been countless piles of electioneering come through the mail slot. I don't recall seeing similar things back home. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist, just that it's not nearly as common a sight as it is here.

So point two is, voters here believe in voting, and believe in their party.

If I combine these two points, together with my top point, I come to the following conclusion.
In countries where voting is NOT compulsory, the citizens of the country are more likely to become involved in the campaigns, and in voting. This is evidenced by the turnout of voters during a period where they may have to make personal or financial sacrifice, without needing to.

Don't get me wrong - I do pay attention during elections at home, sort of, and vote not only because I have to, but because I do think it is important. If I wasn't required to, I probably would anyway. At least in Federal elections.

The Australian Electoral Commission provides some information that highlights points for and against, and I'd like to rebut some of them here.

FOR

• Teaches the benefits of political participation

No. It teachs you to participate because you have to, and that the benefit is avoiding a fine or jail sentence. It's classic stick treatment.

• Parliament reflects more accurately the "will of the electorate"

No. It reflects more accurately that many people attend, and don't put anything on the ballot. It's not accurate, because people who otherwise wouldn't care, may randomly pick something, which actually skews the will of the electorate.

• Governments must consider the total electorate in policy formulation and management

what the fuck? They should be doing this anyway. It's hardly a point for the Pro.

• Candidates can concentrate their campaigning energies on issues rather than encouraging voters to attend the poll

Candidates here do campaign. They were more likely to talk to me about the issues, than asking if I was enrolled.

Against

• It is undemocratic to force people to vote - an infringement of liberty

Of course it is. Freedom of choice should still be freedom of choice.

• The ill informed and those with little interest in politics are forced to the polls

Which results in donkey votes, and skewed responses.

• Resources must be allocated to determine whether those who failed to vote have "valid and sufficient" reasons

These resources could be better pumped into education, or health, or a million other things. I'd reckon the amount of money expended in chasing voters exceeds the amounts in actual fines.


Wow. I didn't mean to get so political. My point remains the same though. By not forcing the electorate to vote, the electorate is more likely to become involved and take a stand and have a say in how their country is run. The idiots and mouthbreathers and bogans more than likely don't vote appropriately anyway, so there'd be no loss there. We'd probably see a decrease in the actual costs of running polling places.
People who then complain should be told "so vote".

It's simple. And that's why you should elect me Lord Grand High Leader of Australia and all it's dependencies including but not limited to New Zealand Papua New Guinea and those penguins in Antarctica. Esquire.