Abstract
The principal defense of compulsory voting suggests that it bridges socioeconomic inequalities by fostering a higher, and hence less socioeconomically biased, turnout. However, this article argues that this does not automatically translate into a less biased political voice because compulsory voting also generates socioeconomically biased invalid votes, which is demonstrated on the case of Ecuador. Normatively, we deny the existence of a general moral and legal duty to vote, which would justify compelling a citizen to vote. Achieving higher levels of social equality does not automatically take priority over a citizen’s rights to liberty and conscience. Furthermore, we object in general to the paternalistic justification of compulsory voting made by its defenders. Thus, we find that instituting compulsory voting as an instrument of reducing class inequalities is unwarranted both empirically and normatively.
Highlights
Perhaps the key argument in favor of compulsory voting builds on the notion that compulsion, through its positive effects on voter turnout, reduces inequality both in terms of political and social fairness
As invalid votes do not determine political outcomes, we suggest that switching to obligatory voting does not solve the problem of a socioeconomically unequal voice in politics
Our aim is not to question the associations between compulsory voting and socioeconomic equality identified by comparative research, but rather to question the principal causal mechanism linking compulsory voting and income equality as well as the normative basis for instituting voting duty based on such associations
Summary
Perhaps the key argument in favor of compulsory voting builds on the notion that compulsion, through its positive effects on voter turnout, reduces inequality both in terms of political and social fairness. We question this argument on both normative and empirical grounds. Some of its defenders try to establish a duty to vote and label those who do not participate in voting as free riders. We think that this description is not valid. More equal political participation could be achieved by other means less inimical to personal liberty and autonomy
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
