I read the bio of a lawyer who is considering this as a possibility. My thought is, if voting is a right I choose to use, why make it mandatory?
120952
No, it would be a contradiction in terms. A right implies free choice to express that right, or not. That which is mandatory takes away one's freedom to do otherwise. Voting IS a right, even a privilege. But choosing not to exercise that right is another freedom in and of itself.\n\nLook, I know where this notion is coming from and on some level I can understand it. Entirely too many people in this country, including well-educated people, routinely fail to vote, even in national elections. It's annoying, especially when the hardliners on both sides of the political divide tend to turn out in droves and vote in lockstep. No wonder there doesn't seem to be any middle ground in American politics anymore. It would be nice to see more people voting and I do my best to encourage it among my more apathetic friends. But making it compulsory is a terrible idea that, thankfully, will not happen here. For what it's worth, even when it's a matter of having to decide between the lesser of two evils, I always vote.\n\nP.S. My first real office job involved working for and with lawyers. I learned a lot. Mostly I learned that a great many lawyers are complete jackasses who are out for self-aggrandizement and personal gain at any cost. This explains much, I think.
34174
Sure they could. It's called voting. People need to direct more thought into voting. The American people vote their representatives into office, who in turn get to make the laws and vote for the President. Too many people sit idly by and don't make sure their voices are heard. Whenever there is an issue that I strongly have an opinion about, I make sure to call my Representative's office-be it a local, state, or Federal issue. This is the only way to make sure your opinion gets recorded! They are your elected reps. and are there for you, to vote according to the people of their districts. Signatures on a petition are just an amplification of this. Also, if more people who disagree with the system and would take action to run for office can you imagine the changes that would ocurr? I'm not saying any nutjob can get elected, but if you make sense and others agree with you then why not give it a try? People need to realize they are vested in the actions of this country whether they agree with them or not. We need to eliminate the people from office who do not represent our views as a whole. Our society needs to take action! Stop saying "It doesn't matter when I vote, so I'm not going to vote". That kind of attitude is what's gotten our system into the sorry mess it's in now. If you don't vote or take action, others who do vote will get control of things & quite possibly do things you don't agree with.
485869
I've often thought that everyone should have to pass the same test as an immigrant who is being naturalized before they get the full rights of citizenship.  What we get free we don't value, and far to many people in the U.S. value neither their citizenship nor their freedoms.  I sometimes feel they don't even value their country.  I wouldn't require government service or anything like that for citizenship, that smacks too much of a police state, and it should be something that can't simply be paid for but which will require both work and study.  It would be possible for a person to live in this country without passing the test if they so chose, like a legal alien, they just couldn't vote, hold public office, receive a passport, serve as an Officer of a Court, serve as an Officer in the Armed Forces, or be eligible for government benefits and assistance.  They would still pay their taxes like any other legal alien.  When U.S. Citizenship is a privilege to be earned, and not a free prize, people might start taking their responsibilities more seriously.
447324
I haven't heard about this specifically, but in theory, I agree- it would just bring in uninformed voters. We need voters who have opinions that need to be heard; the payoff of voting is having someone in office to do the job correctly and get things done, what's a better incentive to vote than that?
427061
There is one thing for  sure. There should always be a paper vote. There is no way to verify results without one.  Do not use a ballot with chads, just a plain piece of paper. with a hole punched in it. That eliminates the BS we all suffered during the 2000 election. Next, the ballots should be counted right there,  With representatives from both parties present. Not allowed by law to be moved. And finally, All voters must present a voter I.D. That would resolve most voter fraud.
501523
Absolutely NOT. \n\nThis would be contrary to everything democracy stands for.\n\nEvery person of voting age should have an equal right to vote - anything else is not democracy and leads to the type of elite-ism satirised in George Orwell's animal farm - all people will be equal but some people will be more equal than others.\n\nWhat is more, I refuse to limit my answer on such an important issue to 25 words and there is not a damned thing you can do about it. \n\nI will use my right of free speech and my right to vote no matter how much you might disagree with my ability to choose wisely. \n\nToo many people don't have this luxury and too many people died ensuring I do have it. I will treasure and defend my right and the right of others to speak and vote freely.
202219
Whether or not they should get it is immaterial the are able to vote themselves what ever they want.  Then they write the laws in such a way that they got a job just in case they get voted out of office.
374718
Democracy is voting,\nVoting is right to choose.\nSo without voting there is no democracy.\nWhat else can be more important then that.
487114
it needs conscious voting not the rules there are many rules which were bent and broken and often modified by those criminals fot their purpose. the power lies in us voters change it forever. it need education moral values in people those who vote, that may come on one day i waitig for that. hpe it will come soon
419756
Draft reinstating was not on the ballot....so no I did not vote for it, nor did republicans.  If it was on the ballot, then I would vote NO...I don't believe that a vote is needed for this action anyway, if the government finds the need to reinstate the draft, they will, this is why boys are required to fill out draft cards at age 18.  The reason the government, no matter which party is hesitant to do this is because it would be very unpopular come the next election.
179089
Non citizens should not have the privilege of voting, as long as they remain non citizens. I will summarize it with one word, DEPORTATION! America is under attack on all fronts by ILLEGAL ALIENS! WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!\nIF YOU'RE NOT ANGRY, YOU'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION!!!!!!!!\nIllegals should not have one iota, narry, nada, zip, zilch, goose egg, absolutely no representation, nor voting privileges. If illegals want to vote, let them GO HOME, to their native country to vote.
289660
Though this isn't a question, I decided to comment.\n\nFor the most part I agree. Yes if you are anywhere illegally it would only make sense that you should be placed back where your are legally allowed to be. And as for our government they don't want to go along with that because it would make them unfavorable to the illegal immigrant vote. Wait did I just say the illegal immigrant vote? Yes...the politicians are worried they won't be voted in by people who can't vote anyway (or shouldn't, though I know fraudulent ID goes a long way).\n\nLaws however are drawn up by use of an underlying moral code. Why is it illegal to murder, rape or rob someone? Because morally it is incorrect. Morally it is correct to believe someone belongs in their own country unless they are given legal permission to be in another country.\n\nLegal permission is the whole point of the matter, I don't care if you want to come to America and make money, by all means do it, this is the land of opportunity. Just check-in on your way across the border. It really shouldn't be so difficult to make sure we are letting people with pure intentions cross over on to our side of the border. If this means you will have to fill out a form, be fingerprinted, and questioned, so be it. It is to all of our benefits to make sure this happens, we don't want to let the wrong person (Terrorists for example) across our borders to kill us (American citizens) and you (the immigrant who is here to cash in legally on America's boundless oppertunities).
512801
I would like to see a law passed that eliminates the tie between voting and jury duty. I believe many low income Americans don't vote because jury duty would break them financially. This is unfortunate.
7343
There is a problem here that goes a little deeper than you might expect.\n\nIn my humble opinion, people in our society have gotten very used to having someone else (i.e. "the government") do things for them.\n\nThey have moved away from (or forgotten) the concept of collaborating with their neighbors, friends, co-workers, acquaintences, etc., to accomplish needed missions and goals.  For instance, the United States has a relatively low voter turnout compared to other countries.  As a matter of fact, sources rank the U.S. in the lowest 25% worldwide in terms of voter turnout among different countries.  It should be noted that some countries such as Belgium, Australia, Brazil, Singapore, Uruguay, to name a few, have compulsory voting.  If you don't vote, you are either fined or disenfranchised.  Compulsory voting is an admirable, if not misguided, attempt at keeping people from becoming complacent.  I believe it is better though to make our decisions freely.  Free will is what was given to us by our Creator, to make right and wrong decisions.  It is what makes us Human. \n\nNow, if we don't tell the government what it is that we want, how can we expect the government to "do anything".  To take it a step further, do we really want the government to "do anything"?  After the tragedy of 9/11, the government "did something" by removing various and sundry civil protections that were afforded to us by federal statute and the Constitution.  Now that's "doing something!"\n\nI, personally, work for the government (a state, but government none-the-less).  Now, I am here to tell you that you really don't want the government "doing anything" without very clear, concise, and incontrovertible, instructions.  It is very important that you go visit at least one government office a week (preferably with a group of your associates) and let them know in very clear terms, what it is that you want them to do. You also could possibly write a letter to the manager or director of the government offices, while sending a copy to your congressman, alderman, commisioner, or what have you, clearly indicating exactly what it is that you think should be done.  Otherwise, the people that work there will go on their merry way, doing what they think they should be doing, when that's not really what they should be doing at all.  But you can't blame them... you didn't tell them!  So how are they to know?  They are people just like you and me.  But sometimes they get isolated and lost, and they forget. At first, it may appear that they are unresponsive.  But that is only because they have gone so long without being reminded what it is that they are supposed to be doing.  It may even be necessary, at first, for you and your associates to stand out in the street in front of the government office, and make a spectacle of yourselves.  But like I said, it's only because the people that work there have forgotten, because we all have gone on our way and left them to their own devices without the guidance, experience, and knowledge, of the body politic. \n\nI noticed in your question that you mentioned your paycheck.  Have you discussed this with your co-workers?  Are they having issues with their paychecks?  Maybe you should consider organising yourselves as a group, and discussing this with your employer?  Perhaps as a group, in negotiations with your employer, you could come up with ways to increase production and efficiency.  This would increase your employer's profit margin and thereby  make it easier for him to give you a raise.  Of course if after you increased his profit margins, he found himself still unable to consider your plight, you would already have formed a group of people with a common bond and concern that would find it within their ability to deal with that too!\n\nSo to answer your question... No, I don't feel particularly betrayed by my government.  I f
590386
I vote. However, I can understand why people wouldn't vote. Our elected officials are sold to us, plain and simple. Those who have enough money for advertising put themselves on tv between our favorite programs and we pick one. And its usually a which candidate do you dislike the most scenario. But I don't think its a good idea to encourage people to vote for the sake of voting. People should be encouraged to make an informed decision when voting. They should actually get to know the candidates platforms before they vote. If they are gonna vote for a guy because he's the kind of guy they'd like to have a beer with or if they are gonna not vote for a guy because they don't like how exited he sounded at his rally, then I would rather them not show up. It's like we all have to vote on what car we would drive and some of us are making a decision based on fuel economy and safety and some of us who had equal say based their decision on the song playing in the commercial.
452704
Oh yeah....great idea.  Why reward the lazy and ill informed with same day registration?  That is akin to giving some one a driver's license without giving them a driving test.\n\nBesides, the Democrats have been pushing this concept for years along with Motor Voter Registration.  If you aren't familiar with this; it would allow peole to register to vote at the DMV when they apply for a license or filling out a Change of Address Card. The Dems/Libs claim that having people register to vote at City Hall, the Post Office or locations other than the Dept. of Motor Vehicles penalizes the poor and people who don't drive.  If they don't drive why on earth would they go to the DMV...except to get a state ID.  And really, how many people do you know that have a state ID?  My mom had a California state ID because she never learned to drive.  But she went to city hall to register (my dad drove her)...and she was a Democrat!\n\nNext the Dems and other groups will be pushing legislation to allow people to register to vote at Gas Stations, Liquior stores, Unemployment offices and video rental stores.  I kid you not...I have read articles supporting the concept to have people be allowed to register to vote at Unemployment Offices, Welfare Departments and homeless shelters.\n\nI am all for people (legal US citizens) being allowed and able to vote.  But most people seem to forget that voting is a privialge and NOT a right.  People need to make some effort to be allowed to vote.  Besides, if people are allowed to just show up at the polling/voting place to register and vote on the day of the election...how can the election officials be able to verify these "walk-ins" are citizen and ensure they are who they claim to be?\n\nSome Pro Same Day websites...I list these to show how bias some of these groups are, some of the obvious propoganda in the information and to show that even though I oppose SDR  (Same Day Registration) and the HAVA (Help America Vote Act), I have read and reviewed both sides of the argument.\n\nwww.the americanmind.com\nThis site reviews and discusses how Wisconsin already allows SDR.  To register on voting day all you have to show is that you have been a resident of the state for 10 days and show identification with your first and last name.  You DO NOT need to provide a photo ID...you can use a credit card, library card, check cashing card or even a gas, electric or telephone bill.  Gee...no opportunity for fraud with this system!\n\nwww.demos.org\nIn its attempt to support SDR, this Democratic website points out multiple reasons for not allowing SDR.\n\nGood luck with your essay.
381332
I haven't followed this political case, but I believe that any law named after a person is questionable since those pusing it will often be reacting based on emotion and grief, rather than reason.\n\nAny good law will have safeguards, and rational provisions so that whatever action is made illegal is really the action that is the threat. I generally oppose laws that make actions illegal just because they might, in combination with other actions, have the potential to cause harm. I believe in punishing those who cause the harm, and not limiting action based purely on speculation.\n\nThat being said, the voting process has become an emotional one. People -- whether voters or legislators -- pass laws based on their gut reactions, often without any concern for the consequences or long term effects. Logic and reason have largely been abandoned in favor of making headlines.\n\nAnd sadly, that's not likely to change any time soon. Good luck.