Thoughts on compulsory voting
by Simon Longstaff
While it is compulsory for all Australian citizens over the age of eighteen to vote, I imagine the vast majority of people experience this formal requirement as a relatively light burden. However, some will go to the polling place with a strong and principled objection to the idea of compulsory voting.
Of those who object to compulsory voting, the vast majority is likely to regard compulsion as the violation of their liberty to choose when, how and if to participate in the political processes of society. There will be others that would offer other objections. For example, that compulsory voting undermines the quality of political decision-making, at the most fundamental level, by requiring that those ignorant of and uninterested in politics cast their vote.
However, I believe that the principal objection will be directed against the idea of the state imposing such an obligation on its citizens in the first place.
On the other hand, the formal requirement for citizens in Australia is not that they cast a valid vote but, instead, that they turn up at a polling booth, have their name crossed off the register of voters and receive a ballot paper. What a person then does with this ballot paper is a matter for the individual elector.
Seen in this light, compulsory voting in Australia is better understood as a legal obligation to participate in a common civic activity (turning up, etc.) rather than to cast a valid vote. The requirement to turn up is, quite clearly, a restriction on the liberty of citizens. The option of choosing to go to the beach for the whole of the day has been removed. At some time, on election day, each and every citizen of voting age is required to attend a polling booth.
What might justify this infringement of liberty? The best answer that I know is that compulsory attendance is one of the few obligations of citizenship in Australia that involves doing something collectively – as a community.
It is frequently mentioned that we spend a decreasing amount of time doing things together. For example, those who visited Sydney during the 2000 Olympics remarked on the changed atmosphere that prevailed throughout the city. It was not just that the games were in town. Part of the magic of the moment lay in the fact that people, from diverse walks of life, came together on a common activity – whether as volunteers or simply as spectators. I suspect that the secret ingredient was not the Olympics but the fact that we all found ourselves doing something as one.
I want to suggest that our democracy needs more occasions where we get together and engage in a shared activity. For the most part, this should not be as a result of compulsion. Yet, I believe there is room for at least one occasion, held every few years, when all citizens are required to come together in a common, civic enterprise. The requirement that we turn up to vote meets that test.
Being a citizen in a democratic polity requires much more than simply complying with the requirement for compulsory voting. Beyond this we might look to voluntary engagement in the wider political process, the acknowledgement of a prima facie obligation to obey the laws of the land and in particular, a recognition that we, the people, are ultimately responsible for the quality of governance we enjoy.
In other words, if we are serious about being citizens then we need to be fully informed about and fully engaged with the issues that shape our lives, individually and collectively.
discuss this articleDr Simon Longstaff is Executive Director of St James Ethics Centre.
This article was first published in Living Ethics, issue 46, summer 2002
© St James Ethics Centre