Editing Compulsory voting (section)

==Arguments for==

=== Capture voter preferences ===
A system with higher turnout helps make the electorate more [[Representative democracy|representative]] and [[voter suppression]] more difficult. This major step towards the universal democratic principle of "[[One man, one vote|one person, one vote]]" strengthens democracies and aligns the choices of its politicians with the preferences of its citizens. Since lower-turnout races are not [[Random samples|randomized samples]] of an electorate (unlike a [[citizens' assembly]]), they distort the wishes and power of the electorate.

=== Civil responsibility ===
Supporters argue the democratic election of governing representatives is a citizen's responsibility as opposed to a right.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/voting/files/compulsory-voting.pdf |title=Compulsory Voting in Australia |publisher=Australian Electoral Commission |last=Evans |first=Tim |date=16 January 2006 |access-date=22 July 2022}}</ref> Equating in kind to similar civil responsibilities such as [[tax]]ation, [[jury duty]], [[compulsory education]] or [[military service]], voting in these democracies is regarded as one of the "duties to community" mentioned in the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights|United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/voting/index.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110217024646/http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/voting/index.htm|title=Compulsory voting in Australia|archive-date=February 17, 2011|website=Australian Electoral Commission}}</ref> This view asserts that, by introducing an obligation to vote, all citizens governed by a democracy partake in the responsibility for the government appointed by democratic election.

=== Improve candidate choices ===
[[Monash University]] political scientist [[Waleed Aly]] argues that whether compulsory voting favors the right or the left is beside the point, because the most beneficial aspect of compulsory voting is that it will improve the caliber of individuals who run for office and the quality of the decisions that they make. In his words, "In a compulsory election, it does not pay to energize your base to the exclusion of all other voters. Since elections cannot be determined by turnout, they are decided by swing voters and won in the center... That is one reason Australia's version of the far right lacks anything like the power of its European or American counterparts. Australia has had some bad governments, but it hasn't had any truly extreme ones and it isn't nearly as vulnerable to [[demagogue]]s."<ref name=":0">{{Cite news|last=Aly|first=Waleed|date=2017-01-19|title=Voting Should Be Mandatory|newspaper=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/opinion/voting-should-be-mandatory.html|access-date=2017-01-20|issn=0362-4331}}</ref>

=== Mild penalties provide big boosts in turnout ===
Penalties only need to be modest to boost turnout and achieve the goal of attaining a much more [[One person, one vote|representative electorate]], especially since the public and the courts usually insist on a seamless voting process for places with mandatory voting laws.<ref name=":62">{{Cite book |last1=Dionne |first1=E. J. Jr. |title=100% Democracy: The Case for Universal Voting |last2=Rapoport |first2=Miles |others=Cornell William Brooks, Allegra Chapman, Joshua A. Douglas, Amber Herrle, Cecily Hines, Janai Nelson, Brenda Wright, Heather C. McGhee |year=2022 |isbn=978-1-62097-677-7 |publisher=The New Press |location=New York |oclc=1252962012}}</ref>

=== Paradox of voting ===
Supporters of compulsory voting also argue that voting addresses the [[paradox of voting]], which is that for a rational, self-interested voter, the costs of voting will normally exceed the expected benefits. The paradox disproportionately affects the socially disadvantaged, for whom the costs of voting tend to be greater. Australian academic and supporter of compulsory voting, [[Lisa Hill (political scientist)|Lisa Hill]], has argued that a [[prisoner's dilemma]] situation arises under voluntary systems for marginalised citizens: it seems rational for them to abstain from voting, under the assumption that others in their situation are also doing so, to conserve their limited resources. However, since these are people who have a pronounced need for representation, this decision is irrational. Hill argues that the introduction of compulsory voting removes this dilemma.<ref>Hill, L 2002 'On the reasonableness of compelling citizens to 'vote': The Australian case', Political Studies, vol. 50, no. 1, pp.88–89</ref>

=== Political legitimacy ===
The idea that compulsory voting results in a higher degree of [[Legitimacy (political)|political legitimacy]] is based on higher [[voter turnout]] and the more representative electorate that brings.<ref>Levine, Jonathan [http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-case-compulsory-voting-7691 The Case for Compulsory Voting], ''[[The National Interest]]'' 2 November 2012</ref>

=== Protect against demagogues ===
High levels of participation decreases the risk of political instability created by crises or charismatic but sectionally focused demagogues.<ref name="lijph">Lijphart, Arend (1997) [http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/13n5q9qx "Unequal Participation: Democracy's Unresolved Dilemma"], ''The American Political Science Review'' 91(1): 8–11, (Subscription required for full access.)</ref>

=== Reduce income inequality ===
A 2005 [[Inter-American Development Bank]] working paper purported to show that there was a correlation between compulsory voting, when enforced strictly, and improved income distribution, as measured by the [[Gini coefficient]] and the bottom income quintiles of the population.<ref>Chong, Alberto and Olivera, Mauricio, [http://www.iadb.org/en/research-and-data/publication-details,3169.html?pub_id=wp-533 "On Compulsory Voting and Income Inequality in a Cross-Section of Countries"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140106090247/http://www.iadb.org/en/research-and-data/publication-details,3169.html?pub_id=wp-533 |date=2014-01-06 }}, Inter-American Development Bank Working Paper, May 2005.</ref> A 2011 [[Conference Board of Canada]] study on [[International inequality|world income inequality]] – also relying on the Gini index – shows that income inequality is lowest in the Scandinavian countries, where compulsory voting has never existed, while Australia, and to a lesser extent Belgium, which strictly enforce their compulsory voting legislation, have a higher income inequality level than a number of other Western countries, such as Canada, France, Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands, where compulsory voting does not exist.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/hot-topics/worldInequality.aspx|url-status=dead|title=Hot Topic: World Income Inequality – Is the world becoming more unequal?|publisher=Conference Board of Canada|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110925154617/http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/hot-topics/worldInequality.aspx|archive-date=2011-09-25|access-date=2025-03-05}}</ref>

=== Remove voting restrictions ===
Supporters of compulsory voting also argue that just as the [[secret ballot]] is designed to prevent interference with the votes actually cast, compelling voters to the polls for an election removes interference with accessing a polling place, reducing the impact that external factors such as the weather, transport, or restrictive employers might have. If everybody must vote, restrictions on voting are identified and steps are taken to remove them. This notion is especially reinforced when both men and women are required to vote and further sustained by diligent enforcement of laws requiring registration of all eligible voters (deemed adult and without exclusion of any significant community within the population). A growing voter preference towards [[Early voting|pre-polling]] such as [[Postal voting|vote by mail]] can make participation easier, where the voter can fulfil their obligation more at their own convenience prior to polling day, rather than trying to arrange release from their responsibilities on the nominated date of polling.<ref>{{cite web |last=Reader |first=Nathaniel |title=Why more and more Australians are voting before election day |date=5 February 2015 |url=http://theconversation.com/why-more-and-more-australians-are-voting-before-election-day-37159 |access-date=28 March 2018}}</ref>

=== Stimulate political interest and education ===
Other perceived advantages to compulsory voting are the stimulation of broader interest politics, as a sort of civil education and political stimulation, which creates a better informed population.<ref name=":62"/> For example, since far fewer campaign funds are needed to convince people to vote, they can be directed towards discussing proposed policies with a wider range of voters.<ref name=":62"/> Australian senator [[Herbert Payne]], whose 1924 [[private member's bill]] introduced compulsory voting in Australia, believed compulsory voting was necessary to counteract "apathy and indolence" among voters and would bring "a wonderful improvement in the political knowledge of the people".<ref name="bio">{{Cite Au Senate|Sen id=payne-herbert-james-mockford|name=PAYNE, Herbert James Mockford (1866–1944)|first=Michael|last=Roe|year=2004|access-date=2023-01-10 |ref=}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|first=Judith|last=Brett|author-link=Judith Brett|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=06ODDwAAQBAJ|title=From Secret Ballot to Democracy Sausage: How Australia Got Compulsory Voting|publisher=Text Publishing|year=2019|isbn=978-1-925603-84-2|page=136}}</ref>