Home   >   Opinion   >   Article     

Compelling citizens to vote is a mockery of democracy

November 22 2002

Both sides back it, but the arguments for compulsory voting have little merit, writes John Hirst.

On November 30 most Victorians will quietly obey the law that requires them to vote.

Why are we made to vote? Compulsory voting was not introduced because Australians were losing interest in voting. It was introduced in Queensland in 1914 when at the previous election 75 per cent of adults had voted, the best turn-out at state elections at that time.

The Liberal government that introduced the measure faced almost certain defeat at the election due in 1915, and Labor looked set to win a majority of seats for the first time. Labor was better at getting its supporters to the polling booths because it had thousands of campaign workers devoted to the cause. So the Liberals decided to make its supporters turn out in equal force by making voting compulsory.

Labor in Queensland did not oppose the introduction of compulsory voting. It went on to win the 1915 election, which made it think quite well of it.

Compulsory voting quickly became part of Labor's national platform. The advantage to the parties of compulsory voting was that they would not have to spend money and effort in getting people to the polls. "Getting out the vote" would become the government's business.

In 1924 the two major parties in the Federal Parliament quietly cooperated to make voting compulsory. There was almost no debate. Only one member spoke strongly against the measure as a denial of liberty. The bill was carried on the voices - no votes were recorded.

It took only 52 minutes in the House of Representatives and 86 minutes in the Senate for compulsory voting to become law. During the centenary of Federation we were asked what sort of nation is it where people don't know the name of their first prime minister. We might well ask in what sort of nation can compulsory voting be introduced without discussion or debate?

The answer may be a nation where government was already playing an unusual role in elections. From 1901 the citizens of the new Commonwealth did not have to register to vote: the police visited each house and enrolled eligible voters. They did a good job but in a highly mobile society their rolls were always going to be out of date. So in 1911 the government made it compulsory for citizens to enrol.

It was only a small step from compulsory enrolment to compulsory voting. In 1911 several politicians were ready to take it. They asked what was the point of getting everyone on the roll if they did not bother to vote. If parliament was ready to force people to do their civic duty as regards enrolment, why not force them to perform the higher duty of voting? Government could produce a near-perfect electoral roll, and it could complete the job by engineering a near-perfect turn-out. Governments could do anything - even make apathetic men and women into citizens.

Once the Commonwealth had adopted compulsion the the states followed, Victoria in 1926.

Opinion polls record that more than 70 per cent of the people are in favour of compulsion. If all those people voted voluntarily that would be a respectable turn-out. However, compulsion remains not because there is convincing evidence that Australians would not vote under a voluntary system, but because it suits the interests of the parties. The parties are fortunate to have a compliant electorate. The Australian people want to be compelled to vote.

Those who write and comment on politics are overwhelmingly in favour of compulsion. In defending compulsion, they make a distinctively Australian contribution to political philosophy. They argue that with compulsion, governments have to pay attention to the interests of everyone and particularly of the poor, which they could ignore under voluntary voting.

That may be so, but they go on to claim that to move to voluntary voting would "disenfranchise" the poor. This is amazing double-speak. To allow people the freedom to vote or not would be to take the vote from them!

The writers and commentators are scathing about the low turn-out for American presidential elections and boast that in Australia governments have greater legitimacy because all the people take part in their creation. They do not think their case is weakened because the people are compelled to take part.

To the objection that compulsory voting is a denial of liberty, they argue that governments regularly make citizens do things - to serve on juries, to pay taxes, to fight in the defence of the country. Of course governments compel citizens, but compulsory voting relates to another issue altogether: how are governments themselves created. Are citizens to be forced to create governments?

These arguments have been developed in a society where the value placed on personal liberty and the responsibilities of citizenship has shifted markedly from that in other English-speaking democracies. The existence of government is taken for granted and the people can be forced to be citizens. Anyone who takes citizenship seriously must wish it were otherwise.

John Hirst has recently published Australia's Democracy: a short history (Allen & Unwin).



Also in Opinion

Defence policy war heats up

Who's best at managing the state's purse strings?

The vote market is open, let the auction begin

Why we have to learn to live with fear

Keeping an eye onwhere the lolly goes

Beat terror, the Australian way

Resolute diplomacy will send message to North Korea

No beating around the Bush

Republic debate: another Kelly hung out to dry

Doyle and Homer - Simpson, that is

Sparring with the "enemy"

Perhaps more a case of one side losing. . .

All the way with a free trade deal

So, US, this is how the world sees you

Big business has discovered McKids

Nukes: the weapon of yesterday

Simon Crean needs a firmer grip

Compelling citizens to vote is a mockery of democracy

Serving Christ before the pursuit of power

The storm in our Port

When bush comes to shove, Labor listens

Labor spins wildly as Libs stumble but go on

Nature's capacity for recovery will be tested

Any wish to take Crean off the top runs into harsh reality

Solomon loses battle, but the war is about to begin

The AgeMost viewed articles
From midnight AEST

  1. Rose makes sure it counts