How to combat non voters...

[na85]

That's not a reasonable argument, because if nobody had authority over anyone else, we wouldn't be in a society.

I suspect that I would still want to have some sort of authority over everyone else, and that on some basal level, everyone else (yes, even Charles Anthony) would too, because this is human nature. It's instinctual to climb for social dominance, don't try to deny it.

Either way, this has digressed from methods of raising voter turnout, and I submit to all readers that a high-school course on politics is less draconian than mandatory voting (which seems like a bit of a non-sequitur to me), and also would tend to side-step the people who would vote just to receive a tax credit.

[M.Dancer]

I'll day one thing. Pay me to vote and I will fight for more elections.

[GostHacked]

I'll day one thing. Pay me to vote and I will fight for more elections.

If you need to be paid to vote, I would not want your vote, or even wanting you to vote period.

[Topaz]

No one should be paid to vote, the rewards comes from the government voted in and the programs they hand down to the people. Unless, of course you get a government like Harpers that taxed the lowest tax payers!! Shame! One of the freedoms of this country is choice. Vote or not, but don't *itch if you don't like what is happening in Ottawa, if you don't.

[M.Dancer]

I'll day one thing. Pay me to vote and I will fight for more elections.

If you need to be paid to vote, I would not want your vote, or even wanting you to vote period.

Then we agree, paying citizens to vote is a bad idea.

[Durgan]

Whether Canadian's are encouraged to vote by the threat of punishemnt or by reward encouragement will never happen in our great democracy, since no political party will ever suggest either approach.

The issue would become as divisive as abortion, same-sex marriage,, the mission in Afghanistan, government safe injection sites, etc. Don't stir the pot is the best policy, when one has power.

Out Governments will continue to be a group selected by a majority of those who vote, representing in reality about 24% of the voting population. Maybe this is the best that can be achieved in Canada.

Proportional representation seems to be a dead issue. At least it would give better representation of those who have enough interest in voting.

Durgan.

[jbg]

Proportional representation seems to be a dead issue. At least it would give better representation of those who have enough interest in voting.

Durgan.

If you like proportional representation, you'd love Italy's and, to a lesser extent Israel's, revolving door governments and constant elections. I could form the "JBG Party", get, say, 60,000 votes somehow and add to someone's coalition. A good idea? I think not.

[jbg]

Then we agree, paying citizens to vote is a bad idea.

I voted today. Will you pay me? :)

[Yaro]

The solution to this is rather simple. Make spoiling your ballet mean something. IMO the single biggest issue with modern "democracy" is that the original notion of elections as a bloodless revolution is invalid. Formed and modified aristocracy has made becoming an elected official a matter of wealth and heredity.

In order to initiate change in the system outside the control of the elected there needs to be a method to invoke grass roots change. I would suggest that if more then 50% of cast ballets are spoiled then some type of binding citizens assembly be invoked. This assembly gathered by a lottery of the willing could then put forward propositions for system change to be voted on directly by the nation.