Personal tools

Argument: Mandatory voting is cheaper in less populated countries

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

Lowa Prodigal. "The case against compulsory voting." Helium: "Keeping in mind that the United States has more than ten times the voting population of Australia, the financial cost for the two nations is vastly different. Since it costs the Australian government roughly five dollars for every ballot they evaluate, the greater number of voters in America would exponentially increase bureaucratic costs."

"The case against compulsory voting in democracies." Helium: "we must remember that the United States would be the most highly populated nation to attempt to incorporate the policy. In fact, this statistic alone is enough to derail the intentions of compulsory voting in America. Compulsory voting works well in Australia, but the voting population in Australia is far smaller than the voting population of the United States. In 2000, over 105 million voters went to the polls . This figure is about ten times larger than the voting population of Australia, which is no small feat. If the entire voting age population showed up at the polls, researchers would expect to see several million more."

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits