If you are called for jury duty and you don’t show up, you better have a good excuse. Otherwise, you will be fined. Jury duty is considered a civic responsibility, but it is not a voluntary responsibility. You must serve when called.
Why not fine citizens who don’t vote? Australia adopted that policy in 1924. In Australia if you fail to vote, you are fined. If you continue not to vote, the fine increases.
William A. Galston of the Brookings Institution gave three good reasons for mandatory voting in a November 6 article in the New York Times. First, citizenship involves obligations as well as rights. Voting is a responsibility. Second, voters today tend to be people with money and education. The interests of the people on the bottom are not represented at the polls. Years ago when labor unions were strong and “machines” turned out the vote, more people at the bottom were voting. Now the electorate is skewed toward the upper tier.
The third advantage would be that if everyone voted, extremists would be diluted. Only about 40% of eligible voters cast a ballot in the non-presidential House races. The 40% includes Tea Party people and other nut jobs who are intensely political. They skew the political system. If everybody voted, the fringes would be diluted.
No, I don’t think mandatory voting will happen any time soon. In fact, the Republicans love that the rich and the extreme are able to swing low turnout elections. Their entire thrust is to restrict voting, not expand it. Tomorrow we will see further results of low turnout and big money. It won’t be pretty.
No comments:
Post a Comment