Pros And Cons Of Compulsory Voting

Compulsory Voting, the Cure to an Epidemic
The world is faced with a new type of threat. Like a disease, it spreads and seems to have no boundaries. It affects a variety of countries. It threatens republics, democracies, and even monarchies, criticizing their legitimacy until none remains and chaos ensues. This menace is known as low voter turnout. Low voter turnout affects countries all across the world, threating to delegitimize governments that guarantee their citizens the right to vote in elections. This epidemic has taken hold in many countries across the world, and it is essential that we find a way to combat this menace. Many possible solutions have been researched, however, only one, in my opinion, has proved to be effective. This solution
Compulsory voting isn’t a new concept, it was first introduced in Belgium in 1892, and Australia in 1924 (Gratschew). Compulsory voting has been a proven and tested concept for centuries. As Bennett explains in his article, “Academic analysis shows that wherever compulsory voting is used, it increases the turnout of registered voters” (Bennett). One British scholar by the name of Pippa Norris has even found that countries with compulsory voting see a 14% higher turnout then countries with voluntary voting (Bennett). This 14% increase would greatly benefit any country, but especially the United States, the same country that’s ranked 31st out of the 34 countries in the OECD for voter turnout. Out of those 34 countries found in the OECD, the top two countries, Belgium and Turkey, are actually among 28 nations around the world that have compulsory voting, and six of which are part of the OECD (DeSilver). It is now evident that voter turnout has decreased in almost all democracies. Despite these major declines, compulsory voting countries, like Australia and Belgium, remain constant. This proves that countries that use compulsory voting are immune to the low voter turnout