Of course, the range of arguments supporting compulsory voting is matched by a plethora of reasons why the U.S. should keep voting voluntary.
One of the major arguments given by those against compulsory voting is that it leads to a greater number of uninformed voters, noting that those who choose not vote are generally less educated on political issues than those who choose to vote. Critics argue that the resulting surplus of politically ignorant voters has three main negative consequences:
Misleading uninformed voters. It is often asserted that uninformed voters are more susceptible to the influence of money and spending on television ads. A short advertisement is likely to have a greater influence on an uninformed voter than one who already has strong views. This encourages the use of sensational and misleading advertising and may have a negative effect on campaigning techniques. While politicians no longer need to try to convince citizens to go out and vote, they still need to find ways to maximize their vote among less informed voters. Australian political scientist, Haydon Manning notes that compulsory voting often “require[s] banal sloganeering and crass misleading negative advertising.”
Ignoring the wishes of most voters. Since uninformed voters are more easily persuaded, some politicians may choose to focus on marginal voters and ignore their main base of support. Even if compulsory voting leads to less polarization, it may not result in better policy outcomes because complicated and nuanced legislation may be perceived negatively by swing voters.
Dampening the voice of the majority. An additional concern under a compulsory system is that people who are uninformed (or simply do not care about the outcome of an election) may end up voting randomly. The impact of ‘random’ votes ends up being particularly detrimental because it fails to increase civic engagement and may skew election results.
Compulsory voting presents some ethical challenges. Many people argue that it infringes upon individual liberty by denying people the ability to choose not to vote. While it is true that ballots may include a “none of the above” option (though, in practice, typically do not), the act of voting itself may be seen as “endorsing” the current politicians and political system, an endorsement that some citizens may not want to make.
While it seems pretty unlikely right now that compulsory voting will be adopted in the United States, at least on a federal level, it is a policy to keep in mind as America continues striving towards a better democracy.
Explanation:
One of the first things Vladimir I did after he became the ruler of Kiev was to immediately consolidate government and eliminate much of the political opposition.
Answer:
feel more effective.
Explanation:
In general sense, small groups are defined as group of people mostly three or a few more people, but not in large numbers (above twenty) who are together to achieve a common goal. For example, a group of talented guys, that forms a musical group for the purpose of realizing their musical or artistical dreams.
Some of the characteristics of small groups includes:
1. Shared identity
2. Results oriented approach
3. Interdependece
4. Competent team members
Hence, in comparison with the large groups, people in small groups tend to identify themselves with the core structures and goals of the group, there by less likely to take more than their equal share of available resources, which in turn makes them to FEEL MORE EFFECTIVE in general towards the success of the group.
