[EM] compulsory voting

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 03:41 AM 10/18/2005, Anthony Duff wrote:
>I'd worry about the routine use of absentee ballots, because it then
>becomes very easy for people to buy or coerce the voting of others.

Once absentee ballots are permitted, that possibility exists. It 
doesn't have to be routine.

As I mentioned, some jurisdictions here don't require an reason at 
all, any voter can obtain an absentee ballot. However, where reasons 
are required, the requirement is generally unenforceable.

Consider this scenario: the thug says, "Apply for an absentee ballot, 
or I break-a you leg." So the voter applies for the ballot and says 
that he has problems with his leg that would get worse if he goes to 
the polls. And then the thug says, "Sign the ballot and give it to 
me." So the voter does so, and the thug marks the ballot and sends it 
in. But the cost-benefit ratio of this from the thug's point of view 
is lousy. The thug risks, in the U.S., major jail time, for what? One 
vote? One vote in a U.S. presidential election is worth less than 
about ten dollars. Robbing banks has a much better return vs. risk.

I think it should be understood that vote-buying is probably a 
seriously overstated hazard. To actually buy enough votes to win an 
election is extremely difficult. Read "expensive."

Coercion is similarly difficult, not to mention seriously illegal. To 
coerce enough people to matter in an election would be so risky as to 
be thoroughly foolish.

Vote-buying, if it is open and not personal, is perfectly legal. 
"Vote for me, and, if elected, I'll put a chicken in your pot." And, 
in fact, the politician doesn't even have to actually pay.... and if 
he does, it's not his money, it's the voter's money which pays for 
the chickens.