In my final argument, I discussed how another problem with mandatory voting would be getting all of the eligible voters to the polls and that compulsory voting may even be unconstitutional.
Another conflict with mandatory voting is figuring out how to get everyone who is eligible to vote, to the polls. Solari touches on the fact that because voter turnout has declined so much the government is considering whether making voting mandatory is necessary or not (par. 5). However, he also mentions negative characteristics of mandatory voting from countries who have already tried the system, such as Brazil (Solari par. 2). One of these negative characteristics would be figuring out how to effectively run the polls with the size of the eligible voting population in the United States. As Solari points out “. . . the United States would be the most highly populated nation to attempt to incorporate the policy” (par. 17). Mandatory voting may work well in places like Australia, but the United States voting population is significantly greater. Solari also remarks that “In 2000, over 105 million voters went to the polls. This figure is about ten times larger than the voting population of Australia, which is no small feat” (par. 17). Considering this should make the government realize that compulsory voting in the United States would not run near as smooth as in Australia because of the great difference in size. Logically, the United States would have more difficulty with this policy because of the costs, the number of polling stations, and the poll workers. In America, there would be such a great number of voters that containing them and making sure everyone does vote would require an incredible amount of workers and governmental supervision. In their article, "Mandatory Voting Is Not a Necessary Part of Civic Duty," Samples and Basham discuss how voter turnout has not changed in three decades, and how it is declining over time after the law is made (par. 5). If voter turnout has not changed in that long, after the initial push for mandatory voting the percentage of voter turnout is going to go right back where it was. If the government considered these issues then mandatory voting intentions should be derailed automatically because the procedure to tackle this policy is unrealistic. Furthermore, mandatory voting may even be against the United States law according to the constitution. Solari observes, “Under United States law, the forcing of citizens to vote may actually be unconstitutional” (par. 22). He notes that forcing citizens to vote is not within the power of any legislative authority. In other words, making voting mandatory may not even be a possibility. This would be a big issue with mandatory voting, and Solari insists that “The very inclusion of compulsory voting in the United States would allow the government to set up a watchdog organization assuring that people do vote, and are fined for not doing so,” which would threaten the definition of democracy (par. 22). Since the United States has a democracy, the citizens expect that they have the freedom and right to vote or not to vote. Like Jonah Goldberg explains in his article, "Forced Voting Won't Cure Indifference, Ignorance," forcing uneducated and uninterested people to vote is wrong and pointless. The government just wants their policy to be used despite the studies showing that the uneducated voters would do no good except to raise voter turnout (par. 2, 5). In the end this policy of mandatory voting would give the government an excessive amount of power by allowing them to make sure every citizen votes and punishing them if they do not.