Obama: Maybe it's time for mandatory voting

[rbrown1205]

How about this.  Just like our young brothers must register for the draft, but are not required to join the army, perhaps, an arrangement could be put in place where every qualified person (not in prison or not mentally incompetent), age 18 and over is assessed a fine, but it is waived if they go to the polls and vote.  Those who for whatever legitimate documented reason can't go to their district's polls (such as being unavoidably absent from their district, or physically unable to go) can have, say, 60 days before the voting day to establish their identity and vote in absence.    The voters get a numbered card or document that they can attach to their taxes, and the fine gets deducted from that.

 

Jehovah's witnesses can vote for Jesus, and still get the credit for going to the polls, so they do not get penalized, and they won't get the bad reputation for going to the polls any more than our young brothers who register for the draft. 

 

Also, the advantage for people who want for more people to vote is that when people go to the polls, more than likely, people who do not have an alternate reason like JWs will vote, since they are there already.  Plus almost everybody 18 or over will be documented as being either qualified or unqualified to vote, which is not the case right now. 

 

The fine (you can have a different name for it) has to be fixed, enough to want to save, but not beyond most people's budget.   The money collected can go toward something that everyone can support, but not something political.

Edited March 21, 2015 by rbrown1205

[bobby]

there only one problem i think the Gov. dont care if you can aford it or not 

when obama care came out one of my family didnt sine up and was fined more the his weekly pat check 

[trottigy]

seriously, the money backers will never let this get approved. They don't want MORE voters, they are already trying to eliminate voters thru voter ID laws.

Edited March 21, 2015 by trottigy

[Dustparticle]

 Although, the political parties would save money if mandatory would happen. But, here is the main problem, the people don't make the decision of who the next president, it is the Electoral College decide who is the next president. Do we remember what happen to Bush and Gore?

[trottigy]

Although, the political parties would save money if mandatory would happen. But, here is the main problem, the people don't make the decision of who the next president, it is the Electoral College decide who is the next president. Do we remember what happen to Bush and Gore?

Yes, every representative voted exactly the same way as the majority of the people they represented - as they always have.

The system in the US is known as a republic - a representative democracy. That is how it all "works". The people elect individuals to represent them in various decision making roles.

They wouldn't "save money". It would cost them much more - hence it is very unlikely to happen.

We need a better system - and its not a true democracy or a monarchy. We need the Kingdom. It will come soon.

Edited March 21, 2015 by trottigy

[Julsey]

seriously, the money backers will never let this get approved. They don't want MORE voters, they are already trying to eliminate voters thru voter ID laws.

One thing I have learned in life is that if I say something can never happen, it generally does.  ;)

[Dustparticle]

One thing I have learned in life is that if I say something can never happen, it generally does.  ;)

Then please don't say it.

[Stavro]

Yes, every representative voted exactly the same way as the majority of the people they represented - as they always have.

 

That's debatable. In so-called winner-take-all states, the proportional vote of the people might be ignored entirely.

 

For example, let's say that in one state candidate A gets 55% of the popular vote, and candidate 1 gets 45% of the popular vote. Logically, the electoral college votes of the state should reflect that percentage. In reality, the winner-take-all nature means that all the electors of the state vote with the 55%, and the 45% have no representation whatsoever.

 

While the numbers usually even out so the electoral result roughly mimics the popular vote, there have been several occasions that the winner lost the poplar vote, and in a few cases the electors ignored the poplar vote altogether and voted according to their personal preference.

 

With a voting system this convoluted, dumping in more votes certainly isn't going to do anyone any favors.

 

That said, if people are upset about mandatory voting and feel all the named candidates are unfit, the next president might just be a dog or cat.

[Shawnster]

seriously, the money backers will never let this get approved. They don't want MORE voters, they are already trying to eliminate voters thru voter ID laws.

 

Which really isn't that big a deal.  Every state already has a state ID card.  Yet, that's not mentioned in any of the discussions.  It's not a hardship to get a state ID card.  I had one.

 

I saw a Facebook post mocking this whole situation.  "How can you mandate voting without mandated voter ID laws?"

[rbrown1205]

I guess I was just trying to see an arrangement that might work for all parties.  I suppose that won't happen,because people want power more than voting.  Oh, well.  The Kingdom,here it comes!!

Edited March 22, 2015 by rbrown1205

[trottigy]

Which really isn't that big a deal. Every state already has a state ID card. Yet, that's not mentioned in any of the discussions. It's not a hardship to get a state ID card. I had one.

I saw a Facebook post mocking this whole situation. "How can you mandate voting without mandated voter ID laws?"

Nevada doesn't have a voter ID requirement, but the Republicans (for the first time in over 50 years) now have a majority and have put a bill forward for this.

Here is an interesting story about the debate currently going on over voter IDs in Nevada.

http://m.reviewjournal.com/columns-blogs/politics/slash-politics/five-things-we-learned-voter-id-hearing

Edit: for the record, I am not Steve Sebelius, but he can be funny.

Edited March 22, 2015 by trottigy

[50gumbys]

One year I was in Canada when there was an election in Australia.

On getting home, there was a letter for the government stating that I had missed the election and to either pay a fine, or give a good reason why you didn't vote.

This had been sitting in my mail for almost a month by the time I got home!

 

So I went down to their office asap the following day.

Now usually I print off my response with scriptures, and an explanation.

But I hadn't done that this time.

When I got to the office in a fluster, I presented my form and the clerk said - "Oh, you haven't filled the form in."

"Oh dear! I've forgotten the scriptures!"

It's OK luv" she said - and then she told me the different scriptures to use show why Jehovah's witnesses don't vote.

 

They DO pay attention !!!

And I realisesd I needed to study more !!!

Edited March 22, 2015 by 50gumbys

[ChocoBro]

We had the discussion back in school whether there should be mandatory voting laws in a democracy like Germany (due to our nationalsocialistic past) and when I lamented that there are valid reasons to choose not to vote, a classmate of mine commented that if you actually didn't vote because of personal convictions, you would still have the opportunity to go in and drop a crossed-through ballot in the box. If you decided to make a statement, you could write the "candidates" of your choice at the bottom and tick their box (it would still count as an unvalid vote but make a statement)

 

As for "not going to the election booth" and in reference to that WT, I've had some discussion brothers about this, because I do go to referendums to vote on certain issues. Like the smoking ban in clubs and bars a few years ago, or I voted against the implementation of a rather pointless road construction project in the town I live in that would have ruined one of the only large parks in favor of what was a less than mediocre solution to a major problem. Some brothers said I ought not do this anymore because I would be giving up my Christian neutrality. And how would people see it if I went to the voting booth?? But my conscience has absolutely no qualms with it.

[bobby]

I all ways thought that we were not to vote for anything

That concerns the world and it did mater what it was

[Stavro]

As for "not going to the election booth" and in reference to that WT, I've had some discussion brothers about this, because I do go to referendums to vote on certain issues.

 

Perhaps things work differently in Germany, but in the US it's not uncommon for unpopular bills to be tacked on to the end of mundane bills, in the hopes that people on one side will vote without reading the text, and people on the other side will vote just to support the addendum. So while a bill might be titled "road construction", the text might focus on urging the government to go to war with an otherwise peaceful nation.

[peper-eliot]

Perhaps it will be good to include lv p213-214 in our next personnel study  and meditation ...

There are 6 biblical principles to keep in mind

And after that, each one of us will have his "power of discernment trained" to make wise choice in is own situation