The Inside Press

Magazines serving the communities of Northern Westchester

Democrats

Why Mandatory Voting Would Work in Democratic Nations

by

Voters would be more adequately informed about the decisions they are asked to make.

BY ARI BENNETT

The United States and other democratic countries should implement mandatory voting. 

Perhaps the strongest argument against mandatory voting is that every individual has a right to simply not express his or her opinion.  If a person does not want to contribute to the political process and is okay with others doing that for him or her, then why should the government interfere?  But people should not be shocked by the suggestion to impose requirements on our citizens.  There is some precedent for this, with the ultimate good of a working society. 

usa-mapIt seems ironic that many people who do not vote still feel they have a right to complain about policies undertaken by the government.  I see nothing wrong with requiring this slight but very meaningful investment into the political process.  Mandatory voting, having the whole of the public’s voice heard, would be good for the health and progress of a nation.

Mandatory voting is a rather liberal idea that many Republicans and Democrats in America might reject.  However, we should not be offended to be required to do something when it will improve our society.  It is often forgotten that the United States government already requires its citizens to contribute to America in various ways.  From filling out the census to paying taxes to registering for the draft to mandatory education, the United States has in many ways forced citizens to be active participants in the betterment of America.

In the United States, citizens are legally required to fill out the census form every ten years.  Someone not filling out the census is subject to a fine of $5,000.  The primary purpose of the census, written in the Constitution, is so that every ten years we can adjust how many members of Congress each state receives so that each state is properly represented.  Knowing the population of each state helps maintain our democracy, and lets us know how the government should allocate its funding.

In addition, every state requires that all people are in school until at least the age of 16.  While perhaps parents might want to raise their children differently, without a formal education, the government requires one to learn certain material so that he or she can become an educated citizen who can be more capable of contributing to society.

While these comparisons are not perfectly analogous, each asks citizens to do something in exchange for what the government provides them.  Ideally, we would like universal voting among citizens, but we would also like to see those voters to be adequately informed about the decisions they are asked to make. 

I would suggest that the requirement to vote be coupled with programs that increase the knowledge of all voters, particularly new voters who may have felt ill-informed in the past.  This can be accomplished by widespread informational sessions held at public places such as libraries prior to major elections.  Further, candidates could be required to send out mass mailings with a set of bullet points outlining their stance on important issues of the day.

I have heard, from many people my age, that they do not vote because they do not feel educated or informed enough to make such decisions.  Certain groups are less likely to vote than others, and two of those groups include the less educated and younger people.  It is true that the government can still function without a large voter turnout, but it creates an environment in which the government does not work for all people in mind.  The groups who tend to have lower voter turnout will lose out in influencing the adoption of policies that might help them.  I believe all citizens should have a moral obligation to actively inform themselves. 

Additionally, campaigns spend a lot of money on issues directed towards people who intend to vote, and this has created a polarized political atmosphere that is unhealthy for democracy in America.  The benefits include a higher level of discourse and understanding. 

By requiring Americans to vote and educate themselves, we foster a more informed electorate.

Ari Bennett is a junior at Union College studying Studio Arts and Statistics.

A Bernie, Now Hillary Supporter’s Message: To Win, be Bold!

by

“Her campaign is in the tightest of races and there is a real danger of an unstable demagogue assuming the Presidency.”

By Ari Bennett

“Now is not the time to be attacking the Democratic Party.” — Most Democrats

Discourse within the Democratic party doesn’t have to be a love fest. We don’t have to hold hands and avoid difficult discussion. We’re adults. I think the voting age in America is 18? The truth is important, and this election year has shown that many Americans like hearing the truth. For some reason, others like Donald Trump because he instead tells the “truth,” which often simply consists of fear-inducing falsehoods.

To all those who insisted Bernie Sanders was a blind optimist with ideas too big for America (including getting money out of politics, free public college, universal healthcare, and a $15 minimum wage) that would never come to fruition: You’ve been proven wrong. His ideas may not yet have become a reality, but he knows the road toward acceptance is long and requires patience. He is a man capable of compromise. He proved it first by running for President on the Democratic ticket, which he knew, as an Independent, was not a party he fully supported, but was the best way to get his ideas the greatest exposure and widest acceptance. He again compromised by taking a stance to support Hillary Clinton, in order to take down a much greater threat. Bernie compromised by ultimately accepting a Democratic nominee who many would argue is the epitome of what his campaign fought against.

Bernie’s campaign and eventual loss was not for naught. He pushed Hillary to the left on college tuition, and she now supports free public college tuition for all families earning $125,000 or less. I believe she agrees with many more of the policies Bernie fought for, but refuses to explicitly present her positions because she deems it not the politically smart thing to do.

During the primary in New Hampshire Photo by Ari Bennett
During the primary in New Hampshire Photo by Ari Bennett

She remains purposely vague on many issues, pandering to both ends of the spectrum. If polling trends are to be believed, that is not the way to win. Look at Hillary’s choice for VP. While he gave a great acceptance speech, it was a very political decision. This is a man who, like Hillary, is a winner. He is a winner because he is political. He also happens to be white, male, and moderate. In 2005, in a radio ad for governor, he stated, “I’m conservative on issues of personal responsibility. As a former Christian missionary, faith is central to my life. I oppose gay marriage, I support restrictions on abortion — no public funding and parental consent — and I’ve worked to pass a state law banning partial-birth abortion.” This is someone who may present himself well, but by no means has a consistent progressive record.

As we dive into the cyberage, American “backroom politics” has been exposed due to leaks, and people are not happy with what they see. In perhaps any other election year, Hillary may have been the perfect candidate. More than ever, however, Americans want honesty. It’s time Hillary learns this. She needs to stop taking money from big moneyed interests and start taking clear stances on the issues.

Hillary is one of the most qualified presidential nominees in history and her intelligence is unquestionable. I truly believe her morals are in the right place and for the most part she has only the best in mind for Americans, but those morals are skewed by money and a corrupt system, both with which she has became far too comfortable.  But even at the height of my support for Bernie Sanders, I never believed Hillary was malicious; she has always projected a progressive trend. However, she needs to start playing the role of a leader, and stop taking stances only when the timing feels right.  The right time is now.

Honesty and consistency are vital this election. Now is the time for her to look deep within her heart and fully embrace stances on issues that she cares about. Her motives may still be suspect to some, but I’m convinced that each of her goals for America is what is in fact best for America. For those who desire truth and not “truth,” she must stand by the courage of her convictions. She cannot afford to dance around issues like a savvy politician. She must be bold. Her campaign is in the tightest of races and there is a real danger of an unstable demagogue assuming the Presidency. Bernie enchanted me and my peers by bringing something refreshing to politics – honesty and consistency. If Hillary is honest and forthright, and isn’t merely political in her behavior, she can save us from entering what could be the most devastating era in modern American history.

Ari Bennett is a rising Junior at Union College majoring in Math and Studio Art. He also has a passion for politics.

 

 


Like · Reply · 19 hrs