With the abysmal turnouts in most federal elections, not only in Canada, but much of the world, many have been left wondering what can be done to nudge up participation once again.
The highest voter turnout this country has ever had—79.4 per cent in 1958—is still a far cry from the entire electorate voting.
While controversial, the solution to low turnout is pretty clear. Mandatory voting—though not perfect—offers an obvious answer with relatively few problems.
There are a few commonly cited reasons against mandatory voting: it infringes on people’s rights to abstain from voting, and it forces uninformed voters to cast votes they don’t care about that will inform public policy for years.
Nonetheless, voting is a civic duty and a right. As citizens, we already consent to many civic duties, such as jury duty, tax paying, and census filling. Citizens who benefit from living in a governed society have a responsibility to help guide its future course. Rights can be limited in certain situations, according to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and enforcing voting will not lead to a slippery slope where all rights are in jeopardy. Like jury duty, which is mandatory and can lead to a fine if skipped, voting is simply part of participating in a democratic society—ruled by the will of many, rather than the will of a few. As is the case with jury duty, mandatory voting would obviously have exemptions, in case of religious obligations, illness, etc.
As for those who wish to abstain, mandatory voting would not stop them. It would simply force them to show up to cast a ballot—whether anything is written on this ballot at all, is up to the voter. This would reduce situations where people don’t vote out of laziness, while still giving people the options to spoil their ballots in protest or if they feel they are unqualified to decide.
Mandatory voting would also make it easier for people to get out of work to vote, as employers and employees would both be required to participate. This would have the added benefit of making it easier for citizens who are often shut-out of the voting process—marginalized communities, young people—to vote, while giving politicians an incentive to reach out to the broader population instead of just their traditional bases, which can also reduce political polarization.
Mandatory voting would also serve to get more people involved in the political process. Sure, uninformed voters would cast votes—but they’re already doing that anyways, just look at the United States. People that must vote, and know this, are more likely to pay attention to politics, which will create a more informed electorate, and will also give the government more legitimacy. A government that is supported by only 25 per cent of the voting population can’t truly say it is ruling through the will of the people—one that is supported by 60 per cent of the voting population, with 90 per cent of the population having voted certainly can.
Australia, which has had mandatory voting since 1924, has consistently had voter turnouts of over 90 per cent since imposing mandatory voting. The penalties for not showing up are symbolic—often unenforced small fines—but their voting system has served to give them a government that represents the voices of most of their population.
Canada would do well to follow suit.
