Mandatory voting

meat bomb · 20-01-2010 04:34PM #1

In Australian, voting is mandatory, and failure to vote is punishable
by a fine. Does anyone think this would work here? I'd be all for it,
, for one thing, it would go along way to a govt that was fully
representative of society at any given time.

hulioseducer · 20-01-2010 04:38PM

problem is half the country haven't a clue about politics god knows who would end up running the country

walrusgumble · 20-01-2010 04:51PM

hulioseducer wrote: »

problem is half the country haven't a clue about politics god knows who would end up running the country

yes, and the other half who have being voting in the past three elections were clever enough to pick the "right people" to lead our country:D

Could they (other half who haven't a clue) be as bad as the other half (who claim to know)?

I would like to see us get rid of party politics first (party politics as we know it, no harm for a union of like minded people every now and then)

You are right though, I would assume people to do bother to go out to vote at least are voting with intention of seeing a person get elected (whether that person is the right man of course) I would hate to see people take the pis( and vote for someone, even if they hate them, simply for the craic / to be a rebel.

Voting should never be prohibited, but neither should it be mandatory. People have a choice to vote or not. I get the impression (could be a case of no sh*t doc) that voting levels are low due to the lack of trust and isolation politicans have caused between them and the people)

How will manatory voting achieve Ireland getting the best Parliament, local council , government (yeah we don't directly vote), President?

Mediocrity · 20-01-2010 04:53PM

We've enough nanny state interference in our lives.

I might choose to read a novel naked on a beach in the rain on voting day.

Eutow · 20-01-2010 05:19PM

Instead of mandatory voting, have a 'none of the above' option on the ballot sheet. This could cause problems if the majority voted for this option because we would struggle to replace the rejected candidates with new ones.

meat bomb · 20-01-2010 05:40PM

We could extend the postal vote to everyone on an optional basis,
this would allow people to read novels naked on the beach or indeed anywhere
else

. By obliging people to be active in our democracy, will they choose representatives more carefully? As for making protest votes, they still have to choose from the candidates that put themselves forward.

Overheal · 20-01-2010 06:10PM

meat bomb wrote: »

In Australian, voting is mandatory, and failure to vote is punishable
by a fine. Does anyone think this would work here? I'd be all for it,
, for one thing, it would go along way to a govt that was fully
representative of society at any given time.

Give a man two choices: He can be burned alive, or he can drown.

The man will Abstain.

Traumadoc · 25-01-2010 08:56PM

In our democracy its all about getting the vote out , FF are great for using ministerial cars to ferry people to the polling stations and generally getting their supporters to vote. ( sometimes twice!).

It suits them to have this system, making voting just a little inconvenient to a certain proportion of the population. While they are able to mobilise their supporters.

You will never have compulsory voting here, just like you will never have PR in the UK.

BTW Have you ever tried to get a postal vote - it is very difficult.

hallelujajordan · 25-01-2010 09:06PM

Nakatomi wrote: »

In our democracy its all about getting the vote out , FF are great for using ministerial cars to ferry people to the polling stations and generally getting their supporters to vote. ( sometimes twice!).

I presume you can back up your claims of FF electoral fraud with some clear supporting evidence ?

T runner · 25-01-2010 09:27PM

meat bomb wrote: »

In Australian, voting is mandatory, and failure to vote is punishable
by a fine. Does anyone think this would work here? I'd be all for it,
, for one thing, it would go along way to a govt that was fully
representative of society at any given time.

It should benefit people in poorer areas who generally done see the point in voting. In a country like Ireland with a big gap between very rich and very poor this could be positive thing.

Apparently you can write "skippy" on your ballot paper in Australia. The fine is paltry but mandatory voting nevertheless has huge support.

walrusgumble wrote: »

yes, and the other half who have being voting in the past three elections were clever enough to pick the "right people" to lead our country:D

I think the problem we have is more to do with the quality of candidates on the ballot paper. Maybe 100% voting might improve the list on the ballot paper?

25-01-2010 11:22PM

T runner wrote: »

It should benefit people in poorer areas who generally done see the point in voting. In a country like Ireland with a big gap between very rich and very poor this could be positive thing.

Huge gap? What happened to all the people who are neither very rich nor very poor..? :rolleyes:

Apparently you can write "skippy" on your ballot paper in Australia. The fine is paltry but mandatory voting nevertheless has huge support.

I lived in Australia (Brisbane) at the time that Rudd was running for office. Plenty of people chose to pay the fine as a sign of opposition to the parties/people running.. The same thing would happen here. But hey, if punishing people for opposition to the system is the game, go right ahead. Personally, I'm against it.

I think the problem we have is more to do with the quality of candidates on the ballot paper. Maybe 100% voting might improve the list on the ballot paper?

Why? Having more voters is more likely to make the existing batch of clones more acceptable... since these guys can point to the increased numbers of voters as a sign of success and support.. party spin.

The problem with voting in this country is that people are weary. I know at age 32 I can't tell much difference between any of the parties/politicians that have gained office while I've been alive, apart from the physical and the accents. They've all screwed up to some degree (some more than others admittedly). So what's the point anymore with voting these guys/gals in?

And anyone new will canvas under some nifty idea, and then have to give up the majority of their ideals, in order to get support from the more "established" & "experienced" politicians.. In the end, becoming just like the others.

Its all very well and good to have high minded ideals about everyone having to vote.. but realism kicks in, and we have a general apathy against the system, and nobody remotely in power trying to change it. And its unlikely anyone's ideals will last long enough and gain enough support to get into power to change anything.. So sitting on a beach in the rain seems somewhat more productive for a day, than voting. (Although I did vote for an independent who got nowhere in the end)

Traumadoc · 25-01-2010 11:25PM

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I presume you can back up your claims of FF electoral fraud with some clear supporting evidence ?

I never said fraud.
I said voted twice.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/25547398

hallelujajordan · 25-01-2010 11:29PM

Nakatomi wrote: »

I never said fraud.
I said voted twice.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/25547398

Seriously . . you use an example that is almost 30 years old to support your belief that FF engage in a policy of voting twice (electoral fraud) in order to stay in government . . ???

Traumadoc · 25-01-2010 11:54PM

Where did I say it was policy?
Do you believe it is policy?

FF members have done far worse than voting twice in a general election. Some are tax dodgers and are corrupt. :eek:

Joey the lips · 25-01-2010 11:59PM

I always believed that voteing should be mandatory. However i also thought that a voting card should contain "none of the above" in the interest of democracy and social justice.

I believe that you should be fined if you dont vote

and i beleive that you should be stopped a weeks labour if you dont.

hallelujajordan · 26-01-2010 08:01AM

Nakatomi wrote: »

Where did I say it was policy?
Do you believe it is policy?

FF members have done far worse than voting twice in a general election. Some are tax dodgers and are corrupt. :eek:

Well, to be fair, your comment ...

Nakatomi wrote:

FF are great for using ministerial cars to ferry people to the polling stations and generally getting their supporters to vote. ( sometimes twice!).

It suits them to have this system, making voting just a little inconvenient to a certain proportion of the population. While they are able to mobilise their supporters.

. . certainly implies that sometimes voting twice is part of the FF system.

Anyway, back on topic. I quite like the idea of mandatory voting. I think everyone should take a level of responsibility for determining the governance of the country. . . Nothing irritates me more than listening to people who don't vote whinge about how "all politicians are useless" . .

26-01-2010 09:26AM

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Nothing irritates me more than listening to people who don't vote whinge about how "all politicians are useless" . .

TBH I've never understood this mentality. Anyone who has lived in this country for any decent period of time is entitled to complain about these politicians. They've had to live with the politicians mistakes. What irritates me are the people who think voting is some part of elite club where if you decide not to vote, then you should have no opinion.. I've voted every election with the exception of one of them (simply because I couldn't be bothered with the candidates at the time) and I still was capable of pointing to the politicians actions and logically showing how pathetic they were...

hallelujajordan · 26-01-2010 11:50AM

Deleted User wrote: »

TBH I've never understood this mentality. Anyone who has lived in this country for any decent period of time is entitled to complain about these politicians. They've had to live with the politicians mistakes. What irritates me are the people who think voting is some part of elite club where if you decide not to vote, then you should have no opinion.. I've voted every election with the exception of one of them (simply because I couldn't be bothered with the candidates at the time) and I still was capable of pointing to the politicians actions and logically showing how pathetic they were...

I get your point but isn't politics a process that begins and ends with the people. . . ?

Don't we all have a responsibility to play our part in selecting who should lead our country, rather than sitting on the sidelines complaining that others have selected the wrong people.

It's a bit like being asked what you want for dinner, indicating you have no preference and then going "I hate Spaghetti" when the other half serves it up . . . . OK, really bad analogy but you get my point . . if you are not willing to take part in the selection, you have less right to complain when you don't get what you want.

26-01-2010 07:16PM

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I get your point but isn't politics a process that begins and ends with the people. . . ?

Begins and ends? When did politics start in Ireland? Has it really changed all that much in the last 60-70 years? Hell, even the last 20 years haven't changed much from what I can tell.

But I agree that the people are involved... but is it not also influenced by the people who choose not to vote (for whatever reason).. ?

I'm generally rather cynical about Irish politics... (kinda obvious I know). Simply put, I don't think Irish people have that much influence over the process. The infrastructure and culture of Irish politics is only really influenced by the people on the inside rather than the voters. A bit like the top management in Irish Banking.. But that's probably just me. I still vote, but I have no real confidence that any party will do any better than the others, and no individual politician has the influence to create change in the system without being sucked into the normal "tradition" of ignoring the voters and doing whatever they like.

Don't we all have a responsibility to play our part in selecting who should lead our country, rather than sitting on the sidelines complaining that others have selected the wrong people.

Ahh, but what about the people who have voted for many years and then stopped? I'd agree with you about the people who have never bothered to vote ever... they have never tried to understand the system. But the people who have stopped voting due to disillusionment/apathy with the past have just as much right to complain as anyone.

It's a bit like being asked what you want for dinner, indicating you have no preference and then going "I hate Spaghetti" when the other half serves it up . . . . OK, really bad analogy but you get my point . . if you are not willing to take part in the selection, you have less right to complain when you don't get what you want.

I get your point... But you've gone from no right to complain to less right to complain... Non voters do indeed have perhaps less right but they still have the right..

By your reasoning, the people who do vote but voted for the party/politicians that did get into power, have less right than the people who didn't vote for them. After all, they are responsible for putting them into office.. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding your stance completely...

hallelujajordan · 26-01-2010 10:30PM

Deleted User wrote: »

By your reasoning, the people who do vote but voted for the party/politicians that did get into power, have less right than the people who didn't vote for them. After all, they are responsible for putting them into office.. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding your stance completely...

TBH, I don't feel that strongly about the issue . . I don't think I said that serial non-voters have no right to complain but I certainly believe that those who couldn't be bothered engaging in the process have less right to complain when they don't like the outcome ..

And yeah, if you vote for Party X on the basis of a manifesto that says they are going to implement XYZ policies and then they get elected and implement those policies you have less right to complain if the policies turn out to be the wrong ones.

bijapos · 26-01-2010 10:40PM

T runner wrote: »

Apparently you can write "skippy" on your ballot paper in Australia. The fine is paltry .

Anyone care to tell me how they know who exactly put "Skippy" on the ballot sheet in the first place? Are all ballot sheets numbered against the number on your voting card or what?

jasonwaters · 26-01-2010 11:45PM

meat bomb wrote: »

In Australian, voting is mandatory, and failure to vote is punishable
by a fine. Does anyone think this would work here? I'd be all for it,
, for one thing, it would go along way to a govt that was fully
representative of society at any given time.

Yes, as long as there is also a requirement to get a 'voting license' to prove a basic understanding of our electoral system

simonj · 08-02-2010 12:25PM

I would not agree with a voting licence, democracy - to paraphrase - is a rotten system, but we have not found a better one yet.
The way it works best is to encourage participation and inclusion

Everyone looks at introducing mandatory voting with fines etc. for those who dont vote - the stick option.

We have the Lottery, which contributes to charities etc.

Why not take some money from that and invest it in a project for participation.

If a voter turns up, and is checked on the list then they stand to win a small sum like 50 or 100 Euro in a lottery for those who participated.

Those who dont have a suitable candidate can spoil their vote, or include the none of the above option.

It also, by removing a fine, does not penalise those who choose not to participate

Its just a suggestion, but at least its a new way of looking at things

I myself believe that a lot of people do not participate because they are dissillusioned with the choice, or lack of. The FF/FG two cheeks of the one arse and gombeen politics are issues - thats why I would like to see at least a partial list system, to give people a chance to have someone who appeals to them elected at a national level - but that is a separate debate

amhrannua.com

Liam Byrne · 08-02-2010 02:42PM

hulioseducer wrote: »

problem is half the country haven't a clue about politics god knows who would end up running the country

As reflected with a scary parallel in the Dail : FF + Greens = 83, out of 166.

Liam Byrne · 08-02-2010 02:47PM

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Don't we all have a responsibility to play our part in selecting who should lead our country, rather than sitting on the sidelines complaining that others have selected the wrong people.

You're bang-on with that last part!

Unfortunately, the available options are decided WITHOUT public input.

So if parties don't put forward competent, ethical, decent, forward-looking candidates, I think everyone should be entitled to complain/object.

Unfortunately, the only way to object at the moment is to not vote.

A "none of the above are worthy" would be a great option on a ballot paper, and I think nearly everyone would come out to vote then.

Shea O'Meara · 08-02-2010 03:26PM

hulioseducer wrote: »

problem is half the country haven't a clue about politics god knows who would end up running the country

Yeah, we could end up with some shower of scam merchants who don't give a crap about the average man/woman on the street, who are prepared to do anything to make a buck even at the expense of the state finances....oh wait...

kowloon · 08-02-2010 03:41PM

I'll vote when I see someone worth voting for, until then I have no preference. I shouldn't have to try and judge who would be the least damaging. A slap in the face or a kick in the nuts doesn't constitute a fair choice as far as I'm concerned.

Tommy Bateman · 08-02-2010 04:52PM

meat bomb wrote: »

In Australian, voting is mandatory, and failure to vote is punishable
by a fine. Does anyone think this would work here? I'd be all for it,
, for one thing, it would go along way to a govt that was fully
representative of society at any given time.

Its a good idea that, sure all the more votes for FF.

TheWestsAwake · 11-02-2010 10:01AM

If Fianna Fail win the next election, I will blame George Lee. Lee & his Montrose Male Menopause has done more than any other to disillusion me towards politics. If FF get into power at the next election I will not vote again and join the ranks of the non-voters.

danman · 11-02-2010 05:15PM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Unfortunately, the available options are decided WITHOUT public input.

So if parties don't put forward competent, ethical, decent, forward-looking candidates, I think everyone should be entitled to complain/object.

so join a party and attend the Cumman meetings.
You'll get a vote on who sits on elections.

If your not happy with the candidate, raise an objection.

PanchoVilla · 25-10-2010 10:46PM

I was gonna start a new thread about mandatory voting but decided to use the search function instead.

Apathy and a lack of civic responsibility has crippled Ireland's democracy. Many people quickly forget the thousands who died to bring independence to this country and I feel it's disrespectful to withdraw from the democratic process. Mandatory voting will get people in the habit of thinking about who's running the country and encourage them to participate in our democracy.

I can see a system where every person with a PRSI number will be required to either vote for a candidate or vote "no confidence" in any of the available candidates. If there is a majority vote of "no confidence" then new candidates must be brought forward and another ballot taken. Candidates from the previous ballot would not be allowed to stand for the second one. A fine of 200 euros or thereabouts would be issued to people who decide not to participate.

I think this could start at general elections only at first then move down to local level when people get used to having a say in the workings of their political system.

Mod request: Could a mod maybe add a poll to see what people think? Just a simple "Mandatory voting" "Yes-No" would suffice.

Edit: And yes, this poll will be mandatory!

Mandatory voting

Comments