The Case for Mandatory Voting in Canada Essay

In recent years, due to non compulsory voting, our national affairs and international affairs have been affected. America should have compulsory voting because of increased voter turnout rates, the questionability of the legitimacy of our government and the education of politics for the people.

Canada’s friendly neighbor to the South, the US, has an electoral system that is composed of 3 separate elections, one of them deciding the head of state. The president elected by the people and he or she is the determining person of the country’s political system. In the US runs like a majority system” In Canada, however, elections are held slightly differently. Citizens vote for a Member of Parliament in a 308-seat house and candidates win not by a majority, unlike in the US, but by a plurality. This means that a candidate can actually win by simply having more votes than the other candidates. This method of representative democracy, in general, does not cause too much controversy in a global scope but has

The issue of electoral reform has become more important than ever in Canada in recent years as the general public has come to realize that our current first-past-the-post, winner-take-all system, formally known as single-member plurality (SMP) has produced majority governments of questionable legitimacy. Of the major democracies in the world, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom are the only countries that still have SMP systems in place. Interestingly enough, there has been enormous political tension and division in the last few years in these countries, culminating with the election results in Canada and the USA this year that polarized both countries. In the last year we have seen

Industrial Countries all over the world have seen a steady decline in voter participation; Great Britain is a great example of this. The country has witness turnout in elections falling slowly as time pass. However, the election of 2001 dropped the country from their average of 76% voter turnout to just a 59.4% turnout. Comparatively, Australia, a former colony of Britain, has enjoyed high and steady voter participation since 1924 because of the implementation of compulsory voting. This system has proven to be not only effective in bring voters to the polls, but also effective in improving Australia’s democracy. By evaluating these two countries with similar political structure; one can see the difference in compulsory voting turnouts

Over the years Canadians have headed to the polls to cast a vote for a candidate, in presumption that every vote counts and that Canada has a fair electoral system. Despite those beliefs, are the results of an election a reflection of what Canadians voted for? Does Canada use a fair electoral system? The issue whether the Canadian government should change its first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral voting system has been widely debated over the years. It is an important issue because it concerns each and every Canadian that is able to cast a ballot. Even though the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system is a fast, simple and easy system to use; the Canadian government should adopt a new electoral system because the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system uses an unfair seat to vote share, it generates wasted votes and it alienates minority parties.

Reform is a necessary component in aiding a country in advancement, staying with traditions often causes one to lose their belief in their country and to protest against it. For instance, recently many citizens protested against the first-past-the-post system and demanded proportional representation. Therefore, it is an immensely shared outlook that Canada’s electoral system is outdated. There are various whys and wherefores for this, such as the fact that the party with the majority simply wins whilst the votes for other parties are easily thrown out. At times, this means that a party with little support can easily win. To put it in perspective, imagine that Party A has thirty percent of the votes, Party B has twenty-five percent of the votes, Party D has twenty-three percent of the votes, and Party E has twenty-two percent of the votes; in this scenario, Party A will win the election despite having 70% of the population against this decision. In addition to this, the first-past-the-post system does not allow independent candidates and parties to be represented. A proportional representation system will fix both issues by giving the parties seats in proportion to the vote, thus ending the ruling dynasty of the current three majority parties in Canada, and causing all votes to be represented. Furthermore, in the concluding of the elections, a coalition government may

Canadians, like citizens of numerous countries around the world, take pride in living in a democratic nation. While Canada is unequivocally a democracy, there are certain aspects of the system that call into question its true democratic nature. The first past the post electoral system Canada currently has in place is undemocratic and unjust, as it undermines millions of citizens’ rights to vote. This has influenced a great deal of subsequent apathy and indifference toward politics in the masses, and democracy no longer seems to be a benchmark of Canadian society.

The most important issue in relation to the Canadian electoral process is the debate over whether or not the state should implement electoral reform for federal elections. It is my stance that replacing the Single Member Plurality system (SMP) with the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) is undeniably in the best interest of Canadians, and I will attempt to prove this by contrasting The Limits: Electoral Systems and Electoral Reform - Or How I Came to Love SMP by Christopher Kam, who believes in the current SMP system, and Getting What You Vote For by John Hiemstra, who pushes for a change in favour of the MMP system. This paper will conclude with further critical analysis, as well as my justified stance the MMP system is clearly superior.

Matland and Studler (1996) found that there are larger and more justifiable amounts of female representation in governments that employ a PR electoral system and multi-member districts, as opposed to governments that utilize a FPTP electoral system and single-member districts. Baron and Diermeier (2001) found that Political Parties elected to the government are given a proportion of seats equal to the percentage of votes they receive, in a Parliamentary government with a PR electoral system. These findings are key benefits that a PR system would provide to Political Parties in Canada, which are especially important for smaller parties, such as the Green Party, and women in Canadian Politics since these benefits ensure them better representation in Parliament. In contrast, the FPTP system, an institutional constraint, prevents small parties from gaining governmental power and the diversity of candidates in its single-member districts (Kelly, 2011). Baron and Diermeier (2001) also found that a minority government would be most likely to form in an election under a PR electoral system with list system PR and multi-member districts, which is one change it could have brought to the 2015 election, but there would still be strategic voting in order to support voters' preferred policies. The 2015 federal election saw a high voter turnout, at 68.49 % (Elections Canada, 2015). Blais et al., (2014) found that voter turnout is not higher in PR elections than in FPTP and that voters are not more likely to vote in PR elections when the anticipated reward for voting is higher. This indicates that another change a PR electoral system with list system PR

Throughout Canada’s history, citizens have had an interest in electoral reform. The issue has been continuously brought up in both national and provincial elections for the last couple of decades. Does this mean Canadians are unsatisfied with the current first past the post system or does it mean that they are just following the ‘trend’ that has been brought forward? This question has recently been acknowledged by the government of New Brunswick and as such, has produced a discussion on whether it is a necessary for the province to participate in a referendum to reform its electoral system.

Voting plays an important role in the modern lives that can easily shape the whole world. While some people believe that voting should be voluntary, I believe that voting should be mandatory for more social benefits. This essay will discuss the reasons why voting should be compulsory.

Voting rights have been historically considered the heart of democratic citizenship wherein they hold the value that those controlled by the law should have a say in its conception and establishment. I believe that permanent Canadian residents, who have not yet gained citizenship, should be allowed to vote in municipal elections because universal suffrage is considered one of the most basic elements for an election to be considered democratic, it would boost Canada’s low election turnouts, and it encourages immigrants to integrate into Canadian society.

One of the main benefits that countries which have opted for proportional representation have noticed is an undeniable increase in voter turnout. In a political democracy citizen engagement is incredibly important. In situations where a plurality voting-system has been abandoned in favour of a system utilizing proportional representation the rise in voter turnout averages 7 to 8% (Pilon 155)7. There is no reason to believe that Party-list PR would have any different effect on Canadian parliamentary democracy.

The format of a state’s electoral system plays a foundational role in the quality of its democracy. Illiberal democracies, for example, may limit potential opponents of the ruling party; these kinds of states are generally said to be less democratic than those which encourage political freedom. Because a nation’s electoral structure influences the nature of its democracy, one must take a critical view on current systems and seek to better them where possible. Though not an extreme example, the electoral system in Canada can be said to hinder democracy, albeit indirectly, leading to apathy and discontent amongst the electorate. In a “disproportionate” system such as Canada’s, citizens’ voices are not as easily or accurately represented. For this reason, it is of utmost importance to consider electoral reform so that Canada’s system is more proportionate and conducive to political engagement.

Voting systems all around the world serve more functions than to only elect representatives for the people. Elections create a sense of a democratic environment inside a country; they give accountability and legitimacy to the government in power, assuming it is the people’s voice that is being heard. In a world where most countries enjoy democratic governments and freedom and equality are encouraged, Canada’s current voting system is a nothing but disrespectful to these democratic values. Like in many post-colonial countries, the legacy of imperial regimes has made its way to the modern political system in Canada, still attacking central democratic principles . Canada has been using a single-member-plurality (SMP) electoral system, also