Just saw someone suggesting the US voting system might be improved by compulsory voting like we have in Australia, which pulls the results towards the centre, not extremes. Someone else objected that it removes freedom of choice.
Just saying, our penalties for not voting are very light (a small fine). Plus if you don’t want to vote, you can cast a ‘donkey’ vote by filling the form out wrong (including the time honoured tradition of drawing a dick on it to show you’re unimpressed).
Because everyone has to vote, they make it easy for most of us - many booths at schools or community centres, and on a Saturday. Prisoners vote, people in hospital are assisted, the idea being to make voting accessible to everyone, whether they want it or not. I think that’s better than tactically disenfranchising groups of people, and the so-called loss of freedom of choice is actually misleading.
In my Voting With Spite post, I mentioned that Australia has compulsory voting, and I noted that quite a few people had either positive or negative reactions to that idea. I thought it might be a good idea to talk briefly about what Compulsory Voting actually does to your voting scene.
Now, to be clear, I'm going to be talking about the Australian Experience - that's what I know. I'm aware that Brazil and Belgium both have Compulsory Voting as well, and their experiences are likely to be a bit different. So, let's go through the big ones:
Do you need ID to vote?
Here, the answer is no - an ID can help, because when you get your name marked off the roll at a voting station, they use your name and address, and our driver's licenses have that, but it's not essential. Indeed, if you've changed address and that hasn't been recorded on the roll, you can still vote - this is called a "declaration vote", because the vote is put into an envelope where you "declare" that the information provided is correct, and the vote is counted once the electoral commission has verified the information.
One might think that this open up our system to a lot of fraud, but one of the fun parts about compulsory voting is that voter fraud is very easy to study - in such a system, if someone steals someone else's identity to vote, it will appear that that person has voted twice, and it gets investigated. The only other big fraud option is fraudulent enrolment - and again, because everyone is on the electoral role, if there's concern regarding a fraudulent enrolment, the electoral commission can check with people at the address of the enrolment. The AEC do these sorts of checks after every election, and it turns out, while there are often double votes, most of those are administrative errors (crossing off the wrong person somewhere), or entirely innocent (people with memory issues voting multiple times because they forgot that they'd already voted). During the 2018 election, only 118 cases were deemed worth forwarding to the Federal Police, out of over 20 million votes.
Do Politicians still play to the base?
In Voluntary voting systems, there is a well-known phenomenon where there's an incentive for politicians to, instead of trying to aim for policies that will satisfy the most people, to instead aim directly at their "base", their natural political home voters. The idea is that you don't actually need to persuade the other side to vote for you, you actually need to persuade your side to vote for you. The only prevailing counter to this is that you don't want to be so egregious that you motivate the other side to vote against you.
Historically, this has not been the case in Australia. In Australia, you can depend on your base to vote for you - they aren't going to stay at home, because it's compulsory to vote.
So they play to the centre?
Honestly, it's complicated. The question is often not about whether you're politically "in the middle", but where you live - Just like in other electorates, there are safe seats (where voter movement isn't likely to kick out the incumbent party) and marginal seats (where the margin of votes for a given party is quite small, generally less than 5%). Marginal seats are where political parties can potentially score a seat with only a little bit of a push, so it's standard strategy to build your campaign promises to directly target those marginal voters.
What those marginal voters actually want varies quite a bit, depending on where in the country they are - a marginal seat in Rural NSW need different targeting than a tiny marginal seat in Melbourne. In general these voters are looking for actual improvements in facilities and economic policy, rather than ideology, so while politicians from those seats may be absolute culture warriors, that often isn't what people in the seat are asking about or listening to - they want to know what the nutcase is actually going to do for them.
With that said, rural voters are more likely to want a personal connection to their MP and are much more likely to vote on who they, personally, like the most. This is less the case in Urban electorates, who care much less about who the MP is and what they're like, and much more about their party's platform.
But also also, there is a strong emphasis in politics about playing to "Ordinary Australians", which one can consider a code for "centre views". Of course, Australia as a society is pretty conservative in many ways, so what you consider "centre" may be a little left of what we consider "centre"...
So yeah, not nearly as simple as "playing to the centre" - there's a lot more involved there.
Are there such thing as "Independent" voters?
In Australia, at least, the idea of an "Independent" voter doesn't really exist - Australia's leaders aren't voted for in Primaries, so you don't need to have your political affiliation marked. Some Australians are members of political parties, but that number is tiny - in 2022, the two major parties had 100,000 members between them, in a population of 26 million people - about 0.4% of the population, maybe 0.5% if we count all the minor parties as well.
Are compulsory voters more engaged voters?
In a word? No. Australian society in general doesn't encourage people being overly involved or engaged in politics, especially in working-class subcultures (and of course, every Australian claims to be working class, regardless of their actual class). Like in many places, there's a pressure in face-to-face conversation to suppress political discussion to avoid conflict, and I can assure you that researching your candidates/parties before an election isn't a common activity (and I understand why - there's so many of them).
As a consequence, Australians don't tend to change their vote that often - in fact, studies in Australia have shown that there's a strong correlation between how you vote, and how your parents vote. A Labor voter is likely to stay a Labor voter, and a Liberal voter is likely to stay a Liberal voter, even if they're not a member of the party. This is why most election promises are much more about giving stuff to voters, rather than about legislation around society itself - It's considered safer to deal with infrastructure than it is to deal in culture wars issues.
Wait, if voters don't change often, how do opposition win?
Well, rarely is the honest answer to that question here. Since 1950, the party in federal government has changed only seven times:
Once in 1972, from the Coalition to Labor
Once in 1975, from Labor to the Coalition (although that one was a particularly odd one)
Once in 1983, from the Coalition to Labor
Once in 1996, from Labor to the Coalition
Once in 2007, from the Coalition to Labor
Once in 2013, from Labor to the Coalition
Once in 2022, from the Coalition to Labor
And during that time, there's been 27 elections, so in 20 out of 27 elections, the incumbent won. But with that said, every time the opposition wins, it's in a landslide, winning a huge number of seats.
The reasons for this are obviously complex, but the way I like to think about is that in Australia there's a certain inertia in the voting populace. Once your vote is set, there's not a lot that's going to change that vote - you're generally going to vote for the party that aligns most with you, and that isn't likely to change much. But as a party keeps fucking up (because they always fuck up), the more that votes wobbles - it might, initially, move your party down the preferences, which you might not notice (because it still funnels to you), but eventually, you've pissed off so many people that everyone votes for anyone but you arseholes, which results in the other party getting in with a landslide.
The previous government is usually horrifically savaged, to the point that it takes a few election cycles for them to slowly rebuild numbers, regain talent, and get themselves into a position where, now that the other side has fucked up sufficiently, voters are willing to let them have another shot at the big time.
This, awkwardly, also tends to stifle politically-lead social change, as well. Firstly, it can take decade or more for a party that is willing to engage with your chosen direction of society to become the Government, and even once they are there, it tends to be the case that Governments won't consider leading such changes until they are certain that everyone wants it - The Gay Marriage Postal Survey is an example. Any opinion poll could show you that the majority of Australians were for gay marriage, but the Coalition government of the time was against it. As a delaying tactic, they insisted on a postal survey (it couldn't be a plebiscite, because they couldn't get that through their own MPs) so every Australian had to vote on the issue. The result? 61.6% were for Gay Marriage (and up to 90% in some electorates!).
What if you can't vote?
Australia is something of a world leader in working to ensure that everyone can vote, because it's been generally established that you can't punish someone for not doing something the government has made it impossible for you to do. So, all Australians have access to:
Early Voting (usually for at least 3 weeks before election day)
Postal Voting (and you just have to post it on Election day, it can be received afterwards).
The voting infrastructure is set up that you can vote at any polling station in your state (we now print lower house ballots on demand, so every station has access to every ballot), and there are specific polling stations for interstate voters (where upper house ballots for every state are available).
There are mobile polling stations for voters, so even if you live in a remote town and can't drive to the nearest polling station, polling stations can drive out to you!
These mobile polling stations also attend prisons and hospitals to provide voting access for people who cannot leave to vote.
We even now have telephone voting for Blind folk, with a specialised system set up to allow for a secret ballot, so the phone person assisting the blind voter won't know who the blind voter is.
Australian embassies in other countries are also available for voters, although you are not actually required to vote if you're not in the country during the election campaign.
So, our voting infrastructure is built, as much as is practicable, to ensure that every voter gets every opportunity to vote. If you can't get to a booth on the day, you can early vote or postal vote.
To be clear, this is not a requirement of compulsory voting - it's quite possible to go to this level of effort in a voluntary voting system, and I can absolutely imagine a compulsory voting system that also made it difficult for people to vote (likely disproportionately affecting your political enemies).
Does Compulsory Voting help Minor Parties?
Not really - Preferential voting definitely helps minor parties, but not Compulsory voting. There is one way it might help though - As noted above, if you're pissed off with your current party, you may bump another party higher up on your preferences, even put them as your "1" vote. In a Voluntary voting system, such people might, instead choose not to vote and stay at home, so in that sense, I guess minor parties can be the beneficiaries of voter anger, but of course, that couldn't be the case without preferential voting.
Got more questions? My asks are always open! Ask away!
its getting to that time of year again where those of us that are not god damn yanks will need to see them all flooding everywhere with that fucking not voting nonsense again, which probably also means we’ll see that post about yanks being horrified about our complusory voting show up again and its just...how the fuck is not voting and rampant voter supression somehow “more rights and better freedoms” than a compulsory system that cannot take your damn vote away? how is being forced to give a damn about your democratic rights somehow less of a right? and ultimately...why are there so many god damn yanks that act like not voting is some great big “fuck you” to their systems?
Today is election day and that typically means I bust out my ‘Spike Compels You to Vote’ graphic. But, today, I don’t really need to, because today’s election is in Australia and that means over 90% of eligible voters will vote. And here’s why:
Australia makes it easy to vote both at polling stations and by mail.
Australia assumes that voting is a community activity that generally involves chatting to your neighbours and buying a democracy sausage (hot dog) and/or slice of cake from a pop-up stall (the profits of which go to the local school or community).
Australia makes it compulsory to vote.
I’m lucky enough to be a citizen of multiple countries and to vote in multiple countries. And, as someone who has experienced both the clusterfuck that is voting in American and the gentle pleasure that is voting in Australia, let me say: Aussies have it figured out.
To answer the inevitable questions about compulsory voting:
Shut up about personal liberty! Your government already compels you to do multiple things (obey laws, register births and deaths, submit tax returns etc). Adding occasional voting to your responsibilities as a citizen is not going to break you.
If you’re the kind of feeble-brained asshat who genuinely wants to throw your vote away - you don’t have to actual vote for anyone on the ballot, you just have to show up. You can toss you ballot in the bin unmarked. You can write in ‘Jon Snow’. You can scrawl ‘Fuck Compulsory Voting’ on the ballot, staple it to your head and walk out of the polling station singing ‘My Way’.
Yes, there are exemptions for illness, travel etc. No one’s getting fined if they have a legit reason for not making it to the polling station.
Isn't it undemocratic to be forced to vote though?
Well, I don’t know. I think this is a real cultural difference. Is it undemocratic to pay taxes? I see that as my civic duty. I might not like it, but it’s something I have to do to be a part of society and to benefit from things like roads, and education and (oop!) universal healthcare.
And compulsory voting is just like paying taxes, I guess, except that when I vote I’m using my voice to actually have a little bit of a say into where those taxes I have to pay end up. Like I’ll vote for the party that most closely represents my opinions on where the money the government collects from me should be spent.
I mean, I can see why compulsory voting looks weird if you’re not an outsider, and, like I’ve said before, you always have the option to draw a dick on the ballot paper and abstain that way, but it seems weirder to me that you’d pay taxes and not vote.
If I’m remembering my Australian Politics 101 classes correctly (and I’m probably not, I hated that class) the idea behind compulsory voting goes like this: if we didn’t have compulsory voting, it’d be the most vulnerable people who didn’t vote. It’d be the old people stuck in homes. It’d be the people who had to work that day. It’d be the people who lived in remote areas. So basically the only voters would be the people with the luxury of time and money. And how is that a fair system? Because what way, whose voices get heard? Middle class white people. And they get heard plenty already. Disproportionately so.
Compulsory voting means that every voice does get heard, because if you make it compulsory, the government is obligated to make it accessible to everyone. Which I think, in the end, leaves us with a fairer system than the American one, where suddenly polling boots vanished, people were struck off rolls, and the rules keep changing so that (certain demographics of) people find it extremely difficult to register in the first place.
After being in the US for the 2016 election and seeing how that all panned out, I think I’m pretty happy that our system of compulsory voting is the better one.
Because if every citizen has to vote, then politicians can’t work to disenfranchise you with redrawing boundaries or all sorts of dodgy shit. They actually have to listen to the electorate. All of the electorate.
It’s not a perfect system by all means, but after seeing the alternative in action, I think it’s the best possible system out there.
/it would have complete bipartisan support/ That's the problem, it really wouldn't. The reason the US makes it so hard to vote and tries to pass more laws to restrict the vote then to guarantee it to everyone is because one party (Republicans aka the party currently making a mockery of our country) know that they would be out of office. They rely heavily on the white vote and they control most of our local governments who decide on voting laws. They fear diversity in the US.(1/2)
(2/2) Right now in the US a lot of the districts Republicans control are being sued for gerrymandering (they spread out the white vote and then put all of the minority vote in one district so that one district can’t flip the state from Republican to Democrat.) So an amendment to guarantee all citizens over 18 the right to vote would be logical, it would never receive bipartisan support unfortunately because it would be the end of the Republican Party.
I know the Republicans have been pretty much doing what they can to disenfranchise certain demographics of the voting public. Which, when you think about it, is ludicrous. I mean heaven forbid they actually try to make policies that suit the majority of the people, right? You know, get enough votes to win that way?
That’s why the more I learn about the US system, the more I’m glad Australia has compulsory voting. If most of the population is working class, then the policies the parties put forward damn well better cater for them too, because guess what? Every single person gets a vote on election day. The Australian political party that ignore the working class or the unemployed or struggling families does so at their own peril, and rightfully so.
Like I said, it’s not a perfect system, but I’d take it any day of the US system.
Jimmy Kimmel’s voice trembled when he returned to air. Five days gone. Five billion dollars of Disney’s market value evaporated. Four hundred celebrities, two governors, a fistful of senators, and Ted bloody Cruz all screaming into the void.
“Thank you,” Kimmel said, “for reminding us what democracy sounds like.”
For a moment—just a moment—the scenery collapsed.
Here’s what happened. Here’s…
