Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday March 22 2015, @11:21AM   Printer-friendly
from the but-but-it's-raining! dept.

CNN reports that when asked how to offset the influence of big money in politics, President Barack Obama suggested it's time to make voting a requirement. "Other countries have mandatory voting," said Obama "It would be transformative if everybody voted -- that would counteract money more than anything," he said, adding it was the first time he had shared the idea publicly.

"The people who tend not to vote are young, they're lower income, they're skewed more heavily towards immigrant groups and minority groups. There's a reason why some folks try to keep them away from the polls."

At least 26 countries have compulsory voting, according to the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Failure to vote is punishable by a fine in countries such as Australia and Belgium; if you fail to pay your fine in Belgium, you could go to prison. Less than 37% of eligible voters actually voted in the 2014 midterm elections, according to The Pew Charitable Trusts. That means about 144 million Americans -- more than the population of Russia -- skipped out.

Critics of mandatory voting have questioned the practicality of passing and enforcing such a requirement; others say that freedom also means the freedom not to do something.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @11:33AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @11:33AM (#161049)

    Make campaign contributions illegal. Untie the corporate funding from the us political system. Enact term limits for all political and judicial positions.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +5  
       Insightful=3, Interesting=2, Total=5
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @11:34AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @11:34AM (#161050)

    Corporations are people too. You must allow them to vote with money. What could be more democratic than that?

    • (Score: 1, Disagree) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday March 22 2015, @11:57AM

      You say in jest what I'll say in seriousness. If we're going to tax them, they have every right to participate in politics. I'm however fine with removing their representation if we remove the taxation as well.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @01:11PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @01:11PM (#161091)

        > If we're going to tax them, they have every right to participate in politics.

        By that logic every person, citizen or not, regardless of age, should be eligible to vote simply for paying sales tax on a single transaction in the country.

        • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @01:25PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @01:25PM (#161095)

          I've always thought the age requirement was silly. A baby could vote about as intelligently as a grand majority of adults do, as they either just vote for the same party over and over again, or flip flop between parties that all despise freedom.

        • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday March 22 2015, @02:16PM

          You forgot the dead ones. Oh, and welcome to the Democratic Party.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @05:46PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @05:46PM (#161187)

            huh huh dur

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 23 2015, @04:54PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 23 2015, @04:54PM (#161566)

            welcome to the Democratic Party.

            Its funny, but you're more right on this than anything else, because the Democrat party is everyone who isn't a Republican. The reason they appear to vote as a block or "toe the party line" because Republican ideas are unable to stand on their own merits, so anyone with half a brain who doesn't have an agenda votes against them.

      • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday March 22 2015, @01:45PM

        by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Sunday March 22 2015, @01:45PM (#161099) Homepage
        You tax foreigners - can foreigners vote too?
        --
        Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @02:15PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @02:15PM (#161118)

        I pay property tax on my house and other taxes on my car. Can they vote too?

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday March 22 2015, @02:35PM

          You missed the key bit there, YOU pay those taxes because YOU owe them. Corporations pay their own because THEY owe them.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @05:27PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @05:27PM (#161176)

            And shareholders OWN the company.

            Only those without owners get to vote.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @06:28PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @06:28PM (#161209)

        Bribery is somewhat outside the scope of the standard political process... or at least it's supposed to be in the United States.

      • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Buck Feta on Sunday March 22 2015, @08:20PM

        by Buck Feta (958) on Sunday March 22 2015, @08:20PM (#161253) Journal

        What would keep me from setting up 1,000,000 small corporations and thus controlling 1,000,000 votes?

        --
        - fractious political commentary goes here -
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @08:30PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @08:30PM (#161254)

          >>What would keep me from setting up 1,000,000
          >> small corporations and thus controlling 1,000,000 votes?

          Well, the half billion dollars or so it'd cost to set them up might slow you down. Filling out a million sets of corporate filings would be a tad time consuming. Then another set of annual filings every year.

          You'd need 5 or 10 million people to sit on all the boards. All of whom would have their own opinions,too...

          Other than that, no problems...

          • (Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Sunday March 22 2015, @08:49PM

            by Buck Feta (958) on Sunday March 22 2015, @08:49PM (#161257) Journal

            I think you vastly overestimate the cost to set up and run a small corporation, you certainly don't understand corporate ownership structures.

            --
            - fractious political commentary goes here -
          • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @09:10PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @09:10PM (#161258)

            > Well, the half billion dollars or so it'd cost to set them up might slow you down.

            $50 for an LLC in Arkansas [arkansas.gov]

            > Filling out a million sets of corporate filings would be a tad time consuming.

            Mail merge.

            > You'd need 5 or 10 million people to sit on all the boards.

            Just need one person for an LLC and no reason the same guy can't be on the board of all 1 million.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @10:19PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @10:19PM (#161277)

              And then print out a million copies.buy a million stamps and a million envelopes... Lick all the envelopes. I wonder how big your car will have to be to drive them all to the post office?

              • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 23 2015, @04:48AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 23 2015, @04:48AM (#161359)

                > And then print out a million copies.buy a million stamps and a million envelopes...

                Electronic filing.
                Even if it paper filing was the only option - we have an entire industry in American dedicated to handling the task of bulk mailing.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 23 2015, @04:35PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 23 2015, @04:35PM (#161555)

        You do know that every person _legally_ working in the US, citizen or not, pays income tax (as well social security, etc.).

        Full disclosure: I am a foreigner working in the US on a work permit.

  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @01:09PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2015, @01:09PM (#161090)

    Or/and make an un-cast vote count as a vote against the parties running.

    In the event the 'unvote' reaches a majority the doors to the buildings of the centers of power would be closed, the congress critters and political appointees would be sent home without pay, the lobbying industry would have no-one to lobby, and the civil services would be instructed to carry on as before with unchanged budgets and policies.

    If people noticed a difference they might be more inclined to vote the net time. Chances are they wouldn't though.

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday March 22 2015, @02:02PM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 22 2015, @02:02PM (#161107) Journal

      The unvotes have outnumbered the votes many times. The vote has been as low as 27% if I recall correctly. Little more than one eligible voter in four voting. That's a pretty big majority, isn't it? More than the 66% supermajority needed to override a presidential veto. More than enough to pass a constitutional amendment.

  • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Sunday March 22 2015, @03:56PM

    by hemocyanin (186) on Sunday March 22 2015, @03:56PM (#161151) Journal

    Real campaign reform would mean that the loser in any election is summarily executed. The politicians would really compete for voter approval in that situation.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by HiThere on Sunday March 22 2015, @07:18PM

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 22 2015, @07:18PM (#161227) Journal

    Term limits didn't work out particularly well in California. The crooked politico ran for higher office (see Diane Feinstein) and the more honest ones quit.

    To be fair, Feinstein might well have run for higher office anyway, her chances for reelection as mayor weren't all that great as many people hated her. And some notably crooked politicos left. But it's much easier to replace a more crooked politico than a more honest one (with an equal).

    Your other suggestions should pretty good, but difficult. What do you do about "independent support committees"? While I don't count spending money as "free speech" (because money isn't equally distributed) the Supreme Court does. And government sponsorship of candidates has all sorts of potential hooks...as in who counts as a legitimate candidate. The trade off we made of allowing easier registration of multiple parties against requiring the media networks to offer equal coverage hasn't worked out very well, largely because the electoral system is based on plurality rather than majority...but that problem wasn't obvious ahead of time.

    I've nearly come to the point where I believe that instead of an election we should have a "draft lotter" managed by the Selective Service. "Your friends and neighbors have selected you to be State Senator....." There's a few places where currently centralized power would need to be diluted so that one "real winner" couldn't louse up everything, but that's a good idea anyway.

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 23 2015, @05:16PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 23 2015, @05:16PM (#161578)

      I believe that instead of an election we should have a "draft lotter" managed by the Selective Service. "Your friends and neighbors have selected you to be State Senator....."

      The culture in the US is far too corrupted and self-centered for that to work. People would rush for the chance to sell their influence so they could get out of poverty. I doubt even 20% of the people in the US would be able to see beyond themselves when it came to governance.