Cumpulsory voting in Americas

Quote: Pacomartin

The Australian system seems to require you to show up at a polling booth and put a marked ballot in a box. It doesn't say it can't be a smiley face. If it is against the constitution (which I don't see) then it won't happen. We really only added that one stupid amendemnt about pay in over 43 years.

That took 202 years to ratify... never knew about that one (not that I've studied the US constitution in great details)

Quote: TheCesspit

That took 202 years to ratify... never knew about that one (not that I've studied the US constitution in great details)

The first 10 amendments were passed in one day, and really should be considered an extension of the original draft. The next two were passed by 1804. There were three amendments as a result of the civil war. Numbers 16-26 were passed from WWI to 1971 (and two prohibition ones cancelled each other out). The #27 was one of two that was on the books since the 18th century. Some legal scholars determined that there was no time limit set at the time, so they could be voted on in perpetuity.

The voting amendments are all about giving votes to all races, women, and 18-21 year old. The poll tax amendment was to prevent revocation of rights.

15th Prohibits the denial of the right to vote based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude. February 3, 1870
19th Prohibits the denial of the right to vote based on sex. August 18, 1920
26th Prohibits the denial of the right of US citizens, eighteen years of age or older, to vote on account of age. July 1, 1971
24th Prohibits the revocation of voting rights due to the non-payment of a poll tax. January 23, 1964

It has been suggested that the vote be given to all citizens at birth, with the proviso that parents can vote for their children under age 18. That would clearly require a constitutional amendment.

But making voting compulsory (subject to a fine) does not seem to contradict a clause that is in the constitution. It is not clear why it would require an amendment or simply a change in federal law (or possibly state laws).

The passing of compulsory voting laws in both Florida and Ohio would probably wrap up the presidential election for Democrats for decades.

Voting is a right in the Constitution, not a
mandatory duty. We have the freedom to
vote or not vote, as it should be. Voting
is not a privilege, like driving, where the
state can make it mandatory to pass a
test and pay for that privilege.

It would need an amendment at the govt
level, and need to pass state by state. Never
gonna happen. It would be just another
freedom taken away from us.

Quote: Evenbob

Voting is a right in the Constitution, not a mandatory duty.

I think there is confusion on two issues. One is this a good idea and Two is it a constitutional issue.
While I agree with you that it is not a very good idea, I am not sure the right not to vote is in the constitution. Hence it can be changed by law on the state level.

If it is a constitutional issue, then I also agree that it is never going to happen.

I was surprised to learn when I went to Australia that voting is supposed to be mandatory. My new boss said you're just expected to show up but you don't have to actually cast a vote. He seemed to feel it was a low priority for the government to go after non-voters as well.

My daughter had to debate this topic recently in her debate tournaments.

Personally, I am opposed to it. If someone doesn't care enough to vote voluntarily, then his opinion doesn't deserve to count.

Quote: Wizard

My new boss said you're just expected to show up but you don't have to actually cast a vote. .

You have to mark the ballot in some way, and then put it in the box. You are free to draw a smiley face in the margin, but you have to mark it.

The law was passed in 1924 when Australia's population was still under 6 million. In 1920 the USA population broke 100 million and at least three states had over 6 million people. Given the size of Australia (2.97 million sq miles vs 3.12 million square miles for CONUS) and the sparse population, I am sure they felt that it would be very easy for people in the outlying districts to try and ignore the federal government.

Not unconstitutional?

The first amendment is a short read: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." [emphasis added]

Mandating people to vote infringes on their right to free speech. Not voting is a form of political expression, too. It would be like a law mandating people to write letters to the editor, or to reply to every email received, or to post on a social media site at least once a day. Or, considering another part of the amendment, a law mandating people to attend religious services.

Sure, people might as well be required to vote on any tax, as that is what politics is, another tax enforced at the barrel of a gun.

They own us and now they want to see us dance.

Quote: Nareed

Not unconstitutional?

The first amendment is a short read: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." [emphasis added]

Mandating people to vote infringes on their right to free speech. Not voting is a form of political expression, too. It would be like a law mandating people to write letters to the editor, or to reply to every email received, or to post on a social media site at least once a day. Or, considering another part of the amendment, a law mandating people to attend religious services.

Money is speech and corporations are people, we lost that first one a while back.

Quote: Nareed

Not unconstitutional?
The first amendment is a short read: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech.

Yes, that's what I'm hearing on TV.
Not voting is a choice and taking
that away is unconstitutional. This
is why it will never happen. The
whole idea of it gives me the creeps.