TOEFL iBT Writing for an Academic Discussion Mandatory Voting (Revised)

In recent years, voter turnout has been declining in many democracies around the world. This trend has led to growing concerns about the legitimacy of elected governments and the health of democratic systems. One proposed solution is to make voting compulsory, as is the case in some countries. Should voting be made compulsory? Discuss the potential benefits and drawbacks of mandatory voting, considering its impact on democracy, civic engagement, and representation.

 

 

 

☆Let’s Read

Read the following excerpt from an article of Harvard International Review, underlined by yours truly Sasaki, and think about why mandatory voting is recommended and what problems can be expected.

 

Compulsion Emboldens Democracy: A Deep-dive into Australia’s Mandatory Voting  12/10/2023

Expanding to Democracies Around the World

As a direct comparison to the turnout at past Australian referendums, the United Kingdom’s referendum to leave the European Union only had a 72.2 percent voter turnout. The lack of voter turnout appears to plague many of the most prominent countries in the world. In India, 67.4 percent of eligible voters voted in the 2019 election. In the United States, 66.8 percent of eligible voters went to the booths in the 2020 election. To further prove the lack of voter turnout, Canada had a 62.6 percent turnout in the 2021 elections. Democratic governments are founded upon the people’s voice, but when nearly a third of the population is left out of the consideration in a country, it is hard to call the country democratic.

 

Australia’s model, which will be on display in the upcoming referendum, could possibly serve as a mechanism by which to increase participation across the world; however, transposing the Australian voting system to democratic systems across the world requires a conversation within the respective countries among its citizens and the government on the way in which it is implemented.

 

A common argument made against accessible elections is the possibility of voter fraud and the reduction in democratic security; the potential trade-off requires a consideration about the different mechanisms that should be implemented to achieve both simultaneously instead of having to comprise one. In Australia, voter fraud was found to be fairly low because of the methods they have instituted behind the scenes to confirm votes and to reduce the likelihood of fraud including digital cross-referencing. On the surface, voting is largely accessible, but the intensive review process provides security on the back-end: accessibility and security do not have to be mutually exclusive.

 

The benefits of compulsory voting does not mean the implementation can be completely uniform. Voters in every country often go through personal struggles that limit their ability to vote, do not agree with any of the candidates running for election, which might necessitate the need for blank ballots to be an option for citizens as a sign of protest, or simply cannot afford the punishments that would ensue if they are unable to vote. So while the system is rigid, it ought to be fluid enough for people to avoid being trapped: they cannot vote, and when they do not, they cannot afford the punishment. The ultimate goal of compulsory voting is to maximize the amount of people interested in the voting process—not contribute to people loathing it because of the punishments they face.

 

When implementing a voting system, countries have to seriously consider the difficulties citizens face when attempting to vote in their country. Who are those citizens? The people who work on weekends because they do not make enough for a two-day break might require a national holiday; the people who live in areas that do not have polling stations nearby; the people who need access to public transportation to reach the booths; the people who are simply disinterested in the democratic process because of a lack of political education, or even the people who are unaware about voter registration. Implementing drastic policy change requires intensive policy analysis to ensure people do not get left out of consideration.

 

In the end, regardless of the voting model adopted by countries across the world, the bottom line is clear: the means for people to vote in an election are crucial for higher voting rates.

 

 

☆Let’s Think

1.        What are the voting rates in Japan?

2.        When you turn the voting age, would you like to go to the poll station to vote? Why/Why not?

 

 

☆Hints for Points

True democracy 

1.       Low voting rates will lead to tyranny because it is a sign that people are not watching those in power. (Japan)

2.       Forced voting is not a form of true democracy, which is “a government of the people by the people for the people” - Abraham Lincoln.

3.       Civics classes must be a required subject before making voting required to increase voluntary voters.

 

Civic engagement

1.        “Just because you don’t take an interest in politics doesn’t mean politics won’t take an interest in you.” - Pericles

2.        People who are poor, who will most benefit from political reforms, are the least to vote (‘Voting is not on their radar': lowest turnout predicted in poorest areas – The Guardian). Mandatory voting will give them a chance that they will appreciate in the end.

3.        Other means for higher turnout such as a referendum on daily issues that accompanies the election would be more effective. (State of Michigan, the U.S.A.)

 

Representation

1.        The change of demography of the U.S.A. makes more progressive candidates elected. The current majority of America are either non-whites, women, or the young, in other words, the anti-Trump demography.  

2.        Poorly informed, uneducated citizens will vote for a wrong candidate or agenda. (Japan)

3.        Good candidates will mobilize voters. (Obama and Bernie)

 

 

☆Sample Answer

【Thesis】I don’t really agree with mandatory voting. Though Eliza’s logic that higher voting rates reflect the will of the public may apply to a working democracy, the real world won’t work that way, where people are not properly informed and are discouraged from choosing the best candidate for them. In the worst-case scenario, it could be a good tool for tyrants. Russia and North Korea celebrate their extremely high voting rates of their presidential elections.

【Supporting Details】Providing correct information and proper civics education, including information about current political climate and candidates to promote voluntary voter participation is necessary as Tim says. If there is a referendum on mandatory voting, probably the bill won’t pass, as no one likes to be controlled. Rather, accessing needs and interests of the constituents and connecting them to politics by getting them to realize that everything in their lives is related to politics will lead to active civic engagement, which will realize good representation and true democracy. The current Mayor of New York Zohran Mandan get elected by listening to the people in the street every day, and he has been praised for his good government since he took office.

【Counterargument-treatment】In an ideally democratic world, voters would be well-informed through the media that check candidates’ legitimacy, political visions, and specific strategies; good election campaign like accessible townhall meetings and direct contact with the candidates; active union movements; and individual citizens’ actions. But actually, the corporate media report either little or false information about candidates, and as a result, people’s interests are focused not on election but on daily matters. In this circumstance, compulsory voting may have an inverse effect on civic engagement. Active pursuers of their best choice, or least horrible choice, are exceptions. Most people will either vote for those who are said to win or resort to a blank voting, which works as either an abstention or a ballot for the incumbent, and so it’s bad for democracy because it contributes to, for example, a reelection of a corrupt incumbent by reducing the votes for the challenger who can correct the corruption.

【Conclusion】Therefore, compulsory voting does not seem to be a good cure for indifference to politics, or low civic engagement. (318 words)

 

 

☆Sample Answer Structure

Thesis

Supporting Details

Why the advantages/disadvantages don’t matter

Conclusion