Analyze a Cartoon 
What does the large hand represent? How can you tell?

In November, people across the United States will vote in midterm elections. They will choose members of the U.S. Congress, as well as state and local officials. But if the past is any guide, tens of millions of Americans won’t participate.

Voters must be at least 18 years old and U.S. citizens. During the most recent midterm election, in 2022, about 234 million American citizens were old enough to cast ballots, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Yet only 122 million voted.

The United States is a representative democracy, a government in which people elect their leaders. So low voter turnout is a major problem, many experts say. They wonder: Can a democracy succeed if its people don’t take part in elections?

As a result, some people are pushing for the U.S. to make voting mandatory, following the lead of more than 20 countries, including Australia and Chile. Lawmakers in Connecticut and Illinois even introduced bills at the state level last year that would require people to vote.

But critics of mandatory voting argue that while casting ballots is important, so is the right to decide whether you want to do it. They say Americans should vote by choice—not because they are required to.

Should voting be mandatory in the U.S.? Consider the arguments and then choose a side.

Many people argue that voting is not just a right; it’s a responsibility. They say making it mandatory is a proven way to ensure people fulfill that duty. After all, countries where voting is required typically have high voter turnout. In Australia, for example, about 91 percent of citizens went to the polls in the last national election.

In the U.S., people who are wealthier and age 65 or older usually cast ballots at higher rates. So making voting mandatory would mean the voices of citizens from more economic backgrounds and age-groups would be taken into account, says Alexandra Oprea. She is a professor of philosophy at the University of Buffalo in New York. “Because you are forcing large swaths of the population to vote . . . you get a more representative sample of the population,” she explains.

Some experts say another benefit of mandatory voting is that citizens tend to pay more attention to what their government does when they know they will have to head to the polls. And elected leaders typically become more responsive to citizens’ feedback in return, points out Lisa Hill. She is a professor of political science at Adelaide University in Australia. “The government will tend to act quickly and pay attention to how the electorate is feeling,“ she explains. “Everyone’s just a little more engaged and invested.”

Critics of mandatory voting say people should not be forced to participate in elections. Just because you have a right doesn’t mean you have to use it, they argue. “You have the right to free speech, but it doesn’t require you to talk,” explains Jason Brennan, a public policy professor at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.

Furthermore, many people point out, mandatory voting is often enforced with fines, which not everyone can afford. In Australia, the fine for not voting is about 14 U.S. dollars. In Chile, the penalty can be up to about $100.

Plus, some people say it is better for the country if only people who are informed about the issues and candidates cast ballots, since an election’s outcome can affect everything from the economy to global relations. A ballot might have more than 10 races on it, each with multiple candidates. If voters haven’t done their research on who the candidates are and what they stand for, they might just end up choosing randomly, says Shane Singh. He is a professor of public and international affairs at the University of Georgia.

“When you force people to vote, they’re more likely to cast a random ballot without really thinking about it,” he explains. “It just means you’re going to have a fuller ballot box,” not a better democracy, Singh adds.