Mandatory Voting: Obama's Bad Idea for America

President Obama routinely floats ideas in the media to test the political waters.  Many of these schemes have been enshrined into law through executive orders, such as amnesty for illegal aliens.  That's why his latest brainchild, mandatory voting, should not be dismissed as idle provocation.

Obama's addiction of telegraphing his policy gambits suggests the president may be plotting to require everyone 18-years and older to vote in federal elections.  He acknowledged his interest in the gimmick during a recent give-and-take with the media.

"In Australia and some other countries, there's mandatory voting.  It would be transformative if everyone voted.  That would counteract money more than anything.  If everybody voted, then it would completely change the political map in this country," the president told reporters.

After there was an outcry over Obama's remarks, White House mouthpiece Josh Earnest tried to walk back the president's statement. "The president wasn't putting forth a specific proposal," Earnest told reporters in a lame attempt to smooth over Obama's impetuous remarks.

Despite Earnest's assurances, everyone would be advised to be wary because Obama's musings have a habit of becoming law over the objections of Congress and the American people.  Remember, the president still has his infamous pen to rewrite American law.  

In touting Australia's compulsory voting plan, the president deliberately chose an example of a country that uses strong enforcement to compel citizens to vote.  In the 22 other countries with mandatory voting laws, less than half invoke sanctions or fines. In those nations, turnout is comparable to the U.S.  

Australia levies fines of $20 to $50 for those who opt not to vote in country-wide elections.  Failure to pay the fines may result in imprisonment.  In spite of the stringent enforcement, 100 percent voter turnout is a myth in Australia.

Ten percent of Australians 18-years and older fail to register to vote. Six percent of Australians who vote in elections turn in a blank ballot as a way of protesting the law.  Another six percent simply pay the fine and avoid the entire election hassle.

There are no guarantees that mandatory voting would have benefited Obama.  The president was victorious in 2008 and 2012 with voter turnouts of 62.3 percent and 57.5 percent, respectively.  However, he won by garnering the ballots of less than 33 percent of registered voters in those elections.

Obama didn't seem to mind that he was elected by less than a majority of registered voters.  But after his Democrat Party was spanked in the recent mid-terms, Obama huffed that low voter turnout (36.4%) was responsible for the Republican election sweep.

Obama postulates that if every American voted, Democrats in general would benefit.  There is absolutely no evidence to support his thesis. Left unchallenged, the president's message has gained traction with Democrats desperate to avoid another embarrassment at the polls.

Extensive research by Pew Research Center for the People and the Press has produced some eyeopening justifications for staying home on election day.  Those who don't vote or rarely participate in elections overwhelming admit they "know little about the candidates."

In addition, Pew found that non-voters believe participation in the election process does "not change things" and they believe the "issues in D.C. don't affect" them.  Majorities of non-voters also confess there are "not interested in local politics" either.

Would disinterested, ill-informed and ambivalent citizens constructively contribute to American democracy by being forced to cast a ballot?   That notion is foreign to most Americans who believe it is every citizen's civic responsibility and solemn duty to vote in local, state and federal elections.

Making voting compulsory won't ensure every citizen votes.  Such action would, however, embolden the government to create a bureaucracy to enforce election participation, levy fines and punish those who violate the law.  Elections would no longer be free but heavily regulated government fiats.

America would reassemble a banana republic rather than the democracy our forefathers envisioned in founding the country.  Would the United States be better off if the nation adopted the forced election edicts of countries like Argentina, Belgium, Bolivia or Costa Rica?  Of course not.

Mandatory voting is a lousy doctrine for a democracy and it invests power in the government not individuals, like so many solutions championed by this president.  It deserves to be resoundingly rejected as antithetical to American ideals.