Compulsory Voting

Posted on November 5, 2010 by peterstone

The latest issue of the British Journal of Political Science features an article by Annabelle Lever on compulsory voting. See–

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayFulltext?type=1&fid=7908207&jid=JPS&volumeId=40&issueId=04&aid=7908205

Lever notes that (pp. 902-903),

Most proponents of compulsory voting believe that voters should have the option to vote for ‘none of the above’, although none of them ever discuss what should happen if that option turns out to have the largest share of the vote in an election, or is sufficient to turn it into the major ‘opposition’ party.

Lever may wish to consider the proposal by Filimon Peonidis made at

http://www.uclouvain.be/cps/ucl/doc/etes/documents/Peonidis.AllottedMPs.pdf

In effect, Peonidis proposes that 1) people be permitted to vote “none of the above” and that 2) if “none of the above” wins any legislative seats, those seats be allocated randomly among the eligible population. In effect, those voting for “none of the above” are voting against the candidates offered and for candidate selection via sortition.

Filed under: Elections, Proposals, Sortition |

« »

One Response

  1. Harald Korneliussen's avatar
    Harald Korneliussen, on November 6, 2010 at 5:33 pm said:

    The problem with this, of course, is that people who vote for politicians are represented twice: once in the conventional manner, once by allotment. Still, at least those who don’t feel politicians represent them get some representation, which is more than they presently get. Where voting is already compulsory, as in Australia, it would be a worthwhile reform to pursue.

    Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.