Quote:
Originally Posted by mick pinner
l still find it a joke that voting, sorry turning up to have your name marked of the roll is compulsary.
|
As gazz and others already alluded too, - many others would eventually, equally find it 'a joke' if less than 60-50% of eligable pop. turned out and voted in a voluntary system. that is also absurd when using the word 'democracy', but the consequences are probably far worse and widereaching? we would have a president bush one day?
I think it has been common wisdom for many years, that non-compulsory voting often favours the right or conservative side of politics, as they are apparently more passionate and rabid on the whole, have more at stake? so more likely to vote. so I guess seeing as we are a country obsessed, and quite rightly, with fairness and the concept of the 'fair go' and is basically all we have in the way of a bill of rights it would seem, e.g the vibe of the fair go lol
it kinda makes sense that we also have compulsory voting, as it is fair to the whole spectrum of politics, not just one slice of it.
But i am reading that that dynamic may of changed, and is starting to favour the left, look at the UK or NZ for example, and the green voters/lefties are more passionate in numbers these days?
so its funny, i didnt hear the coalition make much of that over the last 11.5 years, as serious issue? i did hear some independent opinions like that from individuals, but not as a party policy per se, and you're not likely to hear it from labor either i would imagine. status quo anyone? lol
here's a c&p of for and against reasons from here
http://geography.about.com/od/politi...ulsoryvote.htm
Arguments used in favor of compulsory voting:
*Voting is a civic duty comparable to other duties citizens perform (e.g. taxation, compulsory education, or jury duty).
*Parliament reflects more accurately the "will of the electorate."
*Governments must consider the total electorate in policy formulation and management.
*Candidates can concentrate their campaigning energies on issues rather than encouraging voters to attend the poll.
*The voter isn't actually compelled to vote for anyone because voting is by secret ballot.
Arguments used against compulsory voting:
*It is undemocratic to force people to vote - an infringement of liberty.
*The "ignorant" and those with little interest in politics are forced to the polls.
*It may increase the number of "donkey votes" (bad votes that don't get counted).
*It may increase the number of informal votes (ballot papers which are not marked according to the rules for voting).
*It increases the number of safe, single-member electorates - political parties then concentrate on the more marginal electorates.
*Resources must be allocated to determine whether those who failed to vote have "valid and sufficient" reasons.
overall i find it fascinating why this periodically becomes such a burning hot issue, it seems so trivial, up against some of the other possible issues out there! like fundies putting unauthorised and virtually anonymous blanket leafletters/junkmail suggesting all sorts of unsubstantiated and libelous stuff the night before an election, when that sort of stuff is supposed to have long stopped, containing stuff like so and so candidate is going to eat your babies,with depicted fetus about to be consumed or is secretly a terrorist supporter ect. ect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mick pinner
the right to vote was hard fought, not the compulsary vote.
it's not about time, a vote has to be earned not just expected.
|
Compulsory voting has been around for about 80 years in oz, as JH would of said, I would think that that is considered 'bedded in'

also that means that at the time of the second world war it was well in place, so technically we did fight for it as it stands now? also queensland had it at time of great war, so again technically, we may well 'have fought for it'
what does a candidate or party have to do to qualify to be honoured with your vote? please specify