Compulsory Voting: the threat of consequence if a citizen fails to turnout to vote. The systems and consequences vary between each nation that implements Compulsory Voting (CV), but the basic aforementioned principle remains the same throughout. For example, in both Belgium and Australia, citizens are only forced to enter the polling booth, whereas in Brazil marking of the ballot paper is required. Punishments also vary; in Greece it would be possible for somebody to be sent to prison for failure to vote (although this has never happened), in Belgium there is the threat of disenfranchisement and impossibility of promotion within a public body, and in Bolivia certain public services can be withdrawn from non-voters (Electoral Reform Society, 2003).
Following the Second World War, 83.9% of the Great British public turned out to vote in the 1950 General Election. Fifty one years later and the lowest turnout since was recorded in 2001, with only 59.4% of the public voting in the General Election (UK POLITICAL INFO, 2010), so with voter apathy seemingly at an all-time high in 21st century Britain, CV is certainly an option.
Much research has been conducted in to Compulsory Voting over the last century, including the positives and negatives of what it entails, but how do these findings relate to our island, and ultimately should the people of Britain be forced into voting?
Supporting the notion of compulsory voting in 2005, Leader of the Commons, Geoff Hoon MP, gave a speech declaring that the introduction of CV in Britain would be “a way of ending political alienation, restoring community and addressing the dangerous issue of “serial non-voters” (Wintour, 2005). If this is the case then the argument “for” in Britain is clearly a strong one. Supporters of CV claim that citizens become engaged in politics, and the educative effect is the main benefit (Engelen 2007). As all groups of society would be required to turn up to the polling booth, there would be an increased incentive to understand the effects of the vote. This would certainly be considered a positive in a nation where the same people are perceived to vote in every election. Mr Hoon says “"My fear is that as the older, more regular voters die, we will be left with a significant number of people for whom voting is neither a habit, nor a duty” (Wintour,2005).
Many academics would support Hoon’s proposal for Britain for a variety of reasons. Lijphart (1997) suggests low voter turnout poses a grave democratic issue because the results of such elections may not be representative. This then raises the issue of legitimacy. To give a very simple but not unrealistic example, if only 50% of the population turned out to vote in the next British General Election, winning with a 50% majority, that would mean only a quarter of the 60+ million population had giving the winning party a mandate. While remaining democratic as everyone who is eligible to vote has the opportunity, this result certainly couldn’t be considered representative.
Undoubtedly, political participation in the United Kingdom is imbalanced between different groups in society. Typically the groups most involved would be said to be educated, politically motivated and employed, (Wolfinger & Rosenstone 1980; Powell 1986; Brady 1995; Jackson 1995) and will also feel like they have some sort of civic duty to vote, almost like paying their taxes. Lijphart (1997) suggests that CV should be implemented in such democracies, as it is the best way to resolve the issue of a small number of groups (for example, white males over the age of 40) deciding the outcome of elections, as every section of the population would be fairly represented.
However, this is not an argument that everyone agrees with. Selb and Lachat (2009) suggest that CV compels a substantial share of uninterested and less knowledgeable voters to the poll, who in turn may vote whimsically, randomly, or not in correlation with their political affinity and in turn will not receive what they actually wish to achieve from voting, therefore questioning the argument that CV promotes equal representation of political interests. Compelling uninformed and often uninterested citizens to vote does not only infringe upon their liberty and choice to remain indifferent, but it may well result in elections being decided by such persons (Jakee and Sun 2005). Consequently, Selb and Lachat (2009, p575) argue that “CV brings citizens to the polls who would otherwise not vote, but will not increase their level of political sophistication”, therefore going no way to tackling the issue of equal representation. They go on to claim “Equal representation requires both socioeconomically unbiased participation and voters who vote in accordance with their wants and needs. While CV tends to ensure the former condition by boosting levels of turnout, it fails to guarantee the latter.”
Prior to the introduction of the 1924 Compulsory Voting laws in Australia, voter turnout was as low as 47%, but in the decades since this number has risen to around 94% to 96% (Rosenberg, 2001). But is this legitimate? Jakee and Sun (2005) argue that CV laws inevitably boost turnout as the example shows, tackling one of the issues raised by Hoon; “serial non-voters”, but this is due to fear of reprisal, rather than an increased political activity.
In an article named Should compulsory voting be introduced in Britain? The No argument, British MP Oliver Heald, opposes Hoon’s proposals for the introduction of CV to the British voting system. He complies with Jakee and Sun’s (2005) notion that CV would be an infringement of citizen’s liberty and an unwanted extension of the State into people’s lives, stating that “the right to vote includes the right to say “No thanks””. Finally, Heald suggests that the free vote should be campaigned on “a message of hope and encouragement” rather than focusing on destroying candidates, which can be a popular method, used to influence voters who are unsure of who to vote for, but sure of who not to vote for (Heald, 2009).
As we can see the arguments for and against the use of CV anywhere in the world are strong on both sides. But each nation differs in political background, public attitude and way of life. The political term laissez faire is undeniably French, and this reflects the attitudes of Le Bleus when it comes to political interference. Without interventions such as CV, the 2007 Presidential election brought 84% of the population out to vote. A display of the Frenchs heavy political involvement in most of the nation’s social groupings, furthered by a culture of large scale strikes and often rioting, as seen in 2010.
So with similar issues being raised in both the UK and France in recent times, why have we not seen this in Britain? Some nations, such as France, are heavily politicised through cultural influences, rather than intervention. High turnouts and industrial sized public political reactions show this. In Britain, voter apathy is said to be at an all-time high. But why? Britons have had plenty to be unhappy about over the last decade; two international wars to say the least. But during a time of general wealth in Britain, these issues are far from home, and although indirect effects can be felt in the UK, they have not been played out on citizen’s doorsteps as the Second World War was. However, following the recent financial crisis we have begun to see increased rates of reaction by the public, the violent protests in London during the G20 Summit of April 2009 are a good example of this, as are the student lead marches against tuition fee rises in November 2010. These examples seem to point in the same direction, with Britons appearing to be apathetical in times of general content on home shores, changing when unhappiness, or even fear, is widespread on citizen’s everyday lives. The 84% turnout of 1950 and increased political activity following the recent financial crisis support this notion. This may go some way further to detailing whether CV should be introduced in the UK or not.
In conclusion, we must consider both the negatives and the positives argued for and against the compulsory vote. Many issues have been raised, but I believe three most relevant factors are; political outcome, culture and legitimacy.
The overall majority of people in Britain are enfranchised and there are no viable arguments against this. But I do believe that there is a danger if CV was to be introduced to Britain, that less-educated, less-politicised and less-wealthy citizens would literally be forced into voting as the likely financial deterrent would be too much to face. But how many of these people forced into voting will have knowledge of the election or politics in general? As suggested previously it is these such citizens that are likely to vote “whimsically, randomly, or not in correlation with their political affinity”. The argument against this point is that voters may only be forced to enter the polling booth, or merely tick a “No Vote” box, which would go some way to tackling the issue I raise here, with the majority of those forced to vote choosing this option. But the effect the minority of this group could have is huge, potentially deciding the final outcome of a tightly ran election such as the UK’s last general election in 2010.
The culture of voting is something which is inbuilt in an older generation of British society, a duty to those who have given their lives before us so we could live and vote in a free society. But as this sentiment begins to lapse from generation to generation, the increased turnout when Britain is unhappy is a cultural path we remain on.
Finally, with all this in mind, would the British public swallow being forced to vote as legitimate? The United Kingdom places itself as a world-wide symbol for freedom and democracy. Much impetus of which lies with the “free vote”; seen as a cornerstone of what makes Britain a tolerant and libertarian society. Much as politicisation is important to the French way of life, toleration is key to British lifestyle; free speech, free thought and in turn the “free vote” are all key to this. Therefore, many would argue that attempting to “increase democracy” in the UK through fear is both wholly undemocratic, and wholly un-British.
Bibliography:
BRADY, Henry (1995). Beyond SES: A resource model of political participation. American Political Science Review, 89(2), 271–294.
CHUNG, Jen (2007). French Presidential Election Voter Turnout: 84%. [online]. Last accessed 6 December 2010 at: http://gothamist.com/2007/05/07/french_presiden_1.php
ELECTORAL REFORM SOCIETY (2003). Alternative Voting Methods: Compulsory Voting. [online]. Last accessed 6 December 2010 at: http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=46
ENGELEN, B (2007). Why compulsory voting can enhance democracy. Acta Politica, 42(1), 23–39.
HEALD, MP Oliver. Should Compulsory Voting be Introduced in Britain? [online]. Last accessed 6 December 2010 at: http://www.oliverheald.com/gallery.aspx?id=38-
HEYWOOD, Andrew (2000). Key Concepts in Politics. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.
HEYWOOD, Andrew (2007). Politics, 3rd Edition. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.
JACKSON, Robert (1995). Clarifying the relationship between education and turnout. American Politics Research, 23(3), 279–299.
JAKEE, Keith and SUN Guang-Zhen (2005). Is compulsory voting more democratic? Public Choice, 129(1-2), 61-75.
LIJPHART, Arend (1997). Unequal participation: Democracy’s unresolved dilemma. American Political Science Review, 91(1), 1–14.
MARR, Andrew (2007). A History of Modern Britain. Oxford, Pan Books.
POWELL, Jr, G.B. (1986). American voter turnout in comparative perspective. American Political Science Review, 80(1), 17–43.
ROSENBERG, Matt (2001). Compulsory Voting: Australia is Well-Known for its Compulsory Voting Laws [online]. Last accessed 6 December 2010 at: http://geography.about.com/od/politicalgeography/a/compulsoryvote.htm
SELB, Peter and LACHAT, Romain (2009). The more, the better? Counterfactual evidence on the effect of compulsory voting on the consistency of party choice. European Journal of Political Research, 48(1), 573–597.
UK POLITICAL INFO (2010). General election turnout 1945-2010. [online]. Last accessed 6 December 2010 at: http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm
WINTOUR, Patrick (2005). Hoon calls for compulsory voting. [online]. Last accessed 6 December 2010 at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/jul/04/uk.voterapathy
WOLFINGER, Raymond and ROSENSTONE, Steven (1980). Who votes? New Haven, Yale University Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment