[EARLY DRAFT] On Compulsory Voting

[Elke and Elba]

OOC: I should go get ready to hit by a barrage of tomatoes for this idea. This might cut into parts of CoCR (clause 3b) - the severity and legality hence has to be ascertained before submission.

Also, category needs to be sorted out. I'm thinking that clause 1 can go too since clause 2/3 pretty much nullifies the effects.


Category: Human Rights/Furtherment of Democracy

Strength: Mild

Understanding that certain member states consider voting to be a civic duty rather than a civic right,

Recognising that these member states therefore implement punitive measures in order to ensure their citizens and/or residents vote in state elections, though,

Convinced that citizens should be conferred not only the right to choose, but also the right not to choose,

The World Assembly,

1. PROHIBITS compulsory voting laws in member states;

2. BANS the criminalisation of failing to vote in member states, and;

3. FURTHER PROHIBITS the enforcement of compulsory voting in member states, through punitive methods including but not limited to,
a) fines,
b) disenfranchisement,
c) community service.

[Bananaistan]

1) What's the argument in favour of this? I don't see how it's such a huge issue for countries to view voting as a duty.
2) In any case, we will oppose this as we do any attempts by the WA to interfere in internal democracy of member nations whilst it has yet to even establish a right to vote in all member nations.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Personally, I support this. Compulsory voting makes about as much sense as enforcing the death penalty for suicide. I do, however, have to voice the half-unspoken the question of the Bananamen: how does this affect the international community sufficiently?"

EDIT: "Also, would this count as Political Stability, or Furtherment of Democracy? I see arguments going both ways, there."

[Everlyn]

You fools! *throws tomatoes*

Seriously though, sometimes you have to get people to the polls. democracy doesn't work if you don't get a good percentage of people to the ballot box.

[Riflemoor]

"I must assert my belief that it is not the World Assembly's place to regulate whether or not a society votes. That falls to the country in question.
"This said, it is my opinion that Clause 1 of your legislation should be eliminated; it is covered, as far as I can figure, in Clause 2. In addition, Clause 2 may be further constructed to encompass Clause 3, seeing as it bans criminalization, and criminalization implies punitive action."

[Separatist Peoples]

"I must assert my belief that it is not the World Assembly's place to regulate whether or not a society votes. That falls to the country in question. Suffrage is the right to vote, not the compulsion to.
This said, it is my opinion that Clause 1 of your legislation should be eliminated; it is covered, as far as I can figure, in Clause 2. In addition, Clause 2 may be further constructed to encompass Clause 3, seeing as it bans criminalization, and criminalization implies punitive action."

"Hmm...I wonder what else could be added then. I love the concise nature of a one-clause law, but there's no sense in wasting the opportunity...I'll mull that over."

[The Dark Star Republic]

Convinced that citizens should be conferred not only the right to choose, but also the right not to choose,

"But the WA has not recognised the right to choose. It would seem a bizarre inequality to ban criminalisation of political non-participation, when criminalisation of political participation would remain an option.

"We are very much opposed."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern to the WA

[Elke and Elba]

1) What's the argument in favour of this? I don't see how it's such a huge issue for countries to view voting as a duty.
2) In any case, we will oppose this as we do any attempts by the WA to interfere in internal democracy of member nations whilst it has yet to even establish a right to vote in all member nations.

The argument in this case is more over the infringement of the rights of people not to exercise their choice. Compulsory voting, for me, is the culmination of these ideas over negative liberties/rights, which are rarely reflected in WA legislation.

A bit like forcing people to pray when they don't feel like it (because of some reasons too - like because they aren't religious etc.)

I could always expand it, but we will always go down the slippery slope this way...

encompass Clause 3, seeing as it bans criminalization, and criminalization implies punitive action."

This would probably be a good way to get the Secretariat for a tea session. (OOC: I really have no idea.)

"I must assert my belief that it is not the World Assembly's place to regulate whether or not a society votes. That falls to the country in question.
"This said, it is my opinion that Clause 1 of your legislation should be eliminated; it is covered, as far as I can figure, in Clause 2. In addition, Clause 2 may be further constructed to encompass Clause 3, seeing as it bans criminalization, and criminalization implies punitive action."

But it remains imperative of the WA to assert the individual liberties and rights of people.

One-clause acts are interesting; though if that's the case, this proposal can really be expanded to include negative liberties/rights as a whole. (But that again goes down the slippery slope.)

[Elke and Elba]

Convinced that citizens should be conferred not only the right to choose, but also the right not to choose,

"But the WA has not recognised the right to choose. It would seem a bizarre inequality to ban criminalisation of political non-participation, when criminalisation of political participation would remain an option.

"We are very much opposed."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern to the WA

"I should have probably made myself clearer then," Alethea quipped. "While Ms Chinmusic is very much right in saying that the WA has not recognised the right to choose; the right to choose in itself is the exercising of one's freedom of expression. Therefore, given that criminalisation of exercising one's freedom of expression is very much enshrined in WA's legislation; it would seem equally weird to allow the refusal to exercise one's freedom of expression be criminalised."

[Glen-Rhodes]

The state forces its people to do a lot of things under penalty of fine or imprisonment. Why is voting a special case? Especially considering the very positive impacts compulsory voting has on turnout.

You can make an argument that compulsory voting is a violation of liberty, and it may be a convincing argument. But others can argue that those who don't vote are parasites who reap the benefits of government without doing their democratic duty.

There's also the argument on what compulsory voting means for governments themselves, which is that governments must provides greater means of voting if they're forcing everybody to vote. This can tend to push down turnout stratification.

Whether you believe it is a good idea or not, the World Assembly shouldn't get involved. There's a case to be made that excessive punishment should be banned, especially in cases of illiberal democracy and sham elections. (These states won't listen, but we can try to ban it anyways.) But compulsory voting, when the punishment is a very low fine, is one option among many that states can use to address the problem of decreasing turnout in elections. The World Assembly has no business closing off that option.

[Defwa]

Ambassador Landfree, having been in an inebriated state for several hours before stumbling into this particular chamber, offers a short opinion, "I find that compulsory voting brings in the apathetic and can unjustly support the incumbents as people who don't care have likely not been charged enough to challenge te status quo. Therefore i must find myself in support of this resolution. But I'd like it to do a bit more, on which I may expand later."

OOC: I like that this will totally invalidate everyone's first issue. It was a dumb issue anyway

[Ainocra]

Fleet Marshal Enta produces a sharpie and writes "not an international issue" on his tomato.
Taking careful aim he lets fly. However due to his lack of depth perception the tomato strikes Eduard Heir in the back of the head with a resounding splut.

[The Dark Star Republic]

"While Ms Chinmusic is very much right in saying that the WA has not recognised the right to choose; the right to choose in itself is the exercising of one's freedom of expression.

"Not according to the WA it's not. If you want to write a resolution about freedom of not-expression, go ahead, but Freedom of Expression itself has no impact on voting rights.

"You are presenting yourself as trying to correct an inequality that doesn't actually exist, and so would be creating an inequality in the first place if you went ahead.

"Besides, there are many other civic duties the WA allows nations to make compulsory: national service, civil service, paying taxes."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

[Louisistan]

"There is one - one - popular election in the Confederacy per year. The fools who can't get off their asses and move themselves to a polling place or at least fill out an absentee ballot deserve to pay heavy fines or be drafted into military service. If you can't be bothered to participate it's your own fault.

As for the alleged "right to non-expression", that can be covered by a "none of the above" option, instead of lazy people staying at home on election day."

[Grays Harbor]

Our main objection to cumpulsory voting is that it brings the uneducated people, those who cannot be bothered to do even the most cursory examination of who or what they are voting on, to the polling places. I would much rather have a low turnout consisting of people who actually know what the hell they are voting for rather than a flood of idiots who vote based on the title of a referendum, how the candidate looks, or a coin flip.

[Louisistan]

Our main objection to cumpulsory voting is that it brings the uneducated people, those who cannot be bothered to do even the most cursory examination of who or what they are voting on, to the polling places. I would much rather have a low turnout consisting of people who actually know what the hell they are voting for rather than a flood of idiots who vote based on the title of a referendum, how the candidate looks, or a coin flip.

"And that's perfectly fine. But please don't force your system on us."

[Glen-Rhodes]

Contrary to those who believe compulsory voting simply brings in the uneducated masses, thus lowering the quality of electoral results, most research on the issue of low-information voters is that they vote for the candidates and parties that are favored by the political climate. In other words, low-information voters tend to not change electoral outcomes. That's a really obvious thing, when you consider that structural aspects -- economic performance being the major one -- are highly predictive indicators of electoral outcomes. Even people who don't pay attention to politics know when the economy is doing poorly.

Not that this is about the merits of compulsory voting. No state with compulsory voting wants to force it on others. It works for us. It is not some oppressive violation of liberty. So don't use the iron hammer (haha) of the World Assembly to change the way we vote.

[Three Weasels]

While we fundamentally object to the concept of compulsory voting, we do have a suggestion that would work in the spirit of the bill. E&E, you want to improve democracies in the WA? Then your proposal should provide ways for voters to express themselves at election time if they cannot abstain from voting by remaining home.

A mechanism should exist to allow voters to express dissent at the ballot box in the form of any of the following:

a) a "write-in" field where a candidate not listed on the ballot can be added. Although it may not always be feasible, it would allow voters to include their own candidate. This would support the spirit of the democratic vote.

b) an option for "none of the above". Self-explanatory.

c) legalization of ballot declination/spoiling. Similar to the second option. While it would still require the voter to turn-up at the voter station, they would be allowed to refuse the ballot, or spoil it. Once again, they would be free to express their views while the nation remains in compliance with the spirit of the proposed resolution.

These are just three suggestions. Any combination or alternative could work as well.

[Louisistan]

While we fundamentally object to the concept of compulsory voting, we do have a suggestion that would work in the spirit of the bill. E&E, you want to improve democracies in the WA? Then your proposal should provide ways for voters to express themselves at election time if they cannot abstain from voting by remaining home.

A mechanism should exist to allow voters to express dissent at the ballot box in the form of any of the following:

a) a "write-in" field where a candidate not listed on the ballot can be added. Although it may not always be feasible, it would allow voters to include their own candidate. This would support the spirit of the democratic vote.

b) an option for "none of the above". Self-explanatory.

c) legalization of ballot declination/spoiling. Similar to the second option. While it would still require the voter to turn-up at the voter station, they would be allowed to refuse the ballot, or spoil it. Once again, they would be free to express their views while the nation remains in compliance with the spirit of the proposed resolution.

These are just three suggestions. Any combination or alternative could work as well.

Such a proposal would not be as objectionable. Instead of a voting against, we would abstain from a vote on such a proposal.

[Elke and Elba]

While we fundamentally object to the concept of compulsory voting, we do have a suggestion that would work in the spirit of the bill. E&E, you want to improve democracies in the WA? Then your proposal should provide ways for voters to express themselves at election time if they cannot abstain from voting by remaining home.

A mechanism should exist to allow voters to express dissent at the ballot box in the form of any of the following:

a) a "write-in" field where a candidate not listed on the ballot can be added. Although it may not always be feasible, it would allow voters to include their own candidate. This would support the spirit of the democratic vote.

b) an option for "none of the above". Self-explanatory.

c) legalization of ballot declination/spoiling. Similar to the second option. While it would still require the voter to turn-up at the voter station, they would be allowed to refuse the ballot, or spoil it. Once again, they would be free to express their views while the nation remains in compliance with the spirit of the proposed resolution.

These are just three suggestions. Any combination or alternative could work as well.

Indeed, these are good ideas to go as another way on increasing democracy.

If anything, it could be expanded to include 'urging' clauses for postal ballots and overseas voting.

In effect, this would probably create a bill that now works similarly to the Bananamen's new bill, but one which actually has a purpose.

[Sanctaria]

We are opposed to this. The World Assembly has no business deciding whether or not people have the right to vote within their respective nations; similarly, they have no business deciding whether or not people have the right not to vote.

[Defwa]

While we fundamentally object to the concept of compulsory voting, we do have a suggestion that would work in the spirit of the bill. E&E, you want to improve democracies in the WA? Then your proposal should provide ways for voters to express themselves at election time if they cannot abstain from voting by remaining home.

A mechanism should exist to allow voters to express dissent at the ballot box in the form of any of the following:

a) a "write-in" field where a candidate not listed on the ballot can be added. Although it may not always be feasible, it would allow voters to include their own candidate. This would support the spirit of the democratic vote.

b) an option for "none of the above". Self-explanatory.

c) legalization of ballot declination/spoiling. Similar to the second option. While it would still require the voter to turn-up at the voter station, they would be allowed to refuse the ballot, or spoil it. Once again, they would be free to express their views while the nation remains in compliance with the spirit of the proposed resolution.

These are just three suggestions. Any combination or alternative could work as well.

I actually really like this. Not forcing a vote, but forcing someone to formally declare they will not vote makes people recognize their inaction and address their ignorance, which should have the effect of increasing the number of people who legitimately vote and do so with thought. Sort of like a self shame thing.
At the same time, a mandate for write in candidates would prevent single party tickets used by so many dictatorships to feign legitimacy.

[Mahmud akbar jaya]

We are opposed to this. The World Assembly has no business deciding whether or not people have the right to vote within their respective nations; similarly, they have no business deciding whether or not people have the right not to vote.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Indeed, these are good ideas to go as another way on increasing democracy.

"Not really, no. If anything they provide a disincentive for non-democratic states to transition to democracy, because they will be faced with increasing legal complexities and demands, and grounds for sanction or appeal.

"It's completely ridiculous to think that the WA, which permits totally non-democratic dictatorships and autocracies to be full members, is at the same time going to force those states that do adopt democracy to legalise ballot spoiling."

~ Daisy Chinmusic
Legislative Intern

[Friday Freshman]

Against. Voting in Friday Freshman is compulsory but there is a choice to abstain from voting or write-in a response. We are not forcing them to choose, they still have an option not to choose a person who is running. They just need to declare that they are deciding to do that.