Should the United States adopt a compulsory voting system?

• 
  Seeks outside sources to gain insight
  
• 
  Readily shares resources with others
  
• 
  When appropriate makes strategic use of digital media to enhance understanding of findings
  

• 
  Identifies/highlights key words and phrases
  
• 
  Has notes of main ideas
  
• 
  Includes outside sources
  
• 
  When appropriate makes strategic use of digital media to enhance understanding of findings
  

• 
  No Highlighting
  
• 
  Skims text
  
• 
  Very few notes,
  
• 
  Some misunderstandings of text and meaning.
  

• 
  Unprepared with text
  
• 
  unprepared with text does not recall or has not read text
  
• 
  No attempt was made to understand text
  

• 
  Has prepared several high level questions based on the text
  
• 
  Asks several higher level questions during discussion
  

• 
  Has prepared a variety of questions
  
• 
  Asks thoughtful questions during discussion
  
• 
  Is open to questioning
  

• 
  Has very few questions
  
• 
  Asks very few questions
  

• 
  Has not prepared questions
  
• 
  Does not ask questions
  
• 
  When questioned is unable to respond appropriately
  

• 
  Moves conversation forward
  
• 
  Speaks to all participants
  
• 
  Thinks before answering
  
• 
  Refers directly to the text
  
• 
  Makes connections to other speakers
  
• 
  Considers all options
  
• 
  Offers insightful contributions
  

• 
  Uses appropriate and academic language all of the time
  
• 
  Builds on other’s comments
  
• 
  Prompts others to make comments
  

• 
  Comments often and encourages others
  
• 
  Addresses the issue, stays on topic
  
• 
  Reflects on the text often
  
• 
  Responds to questions
  
• 
  Respectfully considers all opinions
  
• 
  Offers interesting ideas and makes preliminary connections
  

• 
  Uses appropriate and academic language most of the time
  

• 
  Builds on other’s comments
  

• 
  Emphasizes only own ideas
  
• 
  Addresses only teacher’s questioning.
  
• 
  Tends toward debate not dialogue
  
• 
  Ideas do not always connect
  
• 
  Comments neglect details of text. Only focuses on opinion
  
• 
  Only uses academic language a small portion of time
  

• 
  Disruptive or argumentative
  
• 
  Mumbles or is silent
  
• 
  Makes no connection to previous comment
  
• 
  Does not use appropriate academic language
  
• 
  Is engaged in another activity other than listening or speaking for clarification.
  

• 
  Demonstrates effective listening skills (eye contact, nods, takes notes)
  
• 
  Writes down thoughts and questions
  
• 
  Builds on other’s comments
  
• 
  Questions for clarification when needed
  
• 
  Asks for clarification when needed
  
• 
  Develops clear understanding of speaker before making judgment, is reflective
  

• 
  Demonstrates effective listening skills (eye contact, nods, takes notes, body aligns with speaker).
  
• 
  Takes notes
  
• 
  Asks questions for clarification when needed
  
• 
  Suspends judgment until speaker is finished,
  
• 
  No outside activity, only listening
  

• 
  Rarely demonstrates effective listening skills (eye contact, nods, takes notes)
  
• 
  Loses track of conversation
  
• 
  May interrupt or judges other’s ideas without asking for clarification
  
• 
  May sporadically engage in another activity but stops and self regulates.
  

• 
  No effective listening skills demonstrated
  
• 
  Attempts to dominate
  
• 
  Interrupts speakers in middle of sentence
  
• 
  Repeats same ideas
  
• 
  No eye contact or is engaged in another activity rather than listening
  

• 
  Voting is not only a right, but a responsibility. The whole point of freedom is that everyone has a say and has a responsibility to voice their opinion, otherwise the system doesn't work. non-compulsory voting encourages entire classes of people to not bother with voting, since it is demanding, having to stand in long queues all day. People should exercise their right and responsibility to vote.
  
• 
  50% turnout not democracy; mandatory voting necessary. Keith Olbermann. "Make voting mandatory voting necessary." Salon. November 5, 2002: "two modest proposals to get head and hair flying. First: Mandatory voting. You heard me. A democracy where half of the citizens sit back and say, 'no, thanks,' isn't a democracy at all -- just a really large oligarchy. If we have not already reached it, we are nearing, inevitably, the point at which everyone who votes has a personal stake in the outcome. As the percentage of lever-pullers continues to decline, it's going to eventually be just the candidates' friends, families and people from their secret second lives who even bother to show up. You know -- like park league softball."
  
• 
  Mandatory voting broadens representation and legitimacy. Such a system guarantees that the government represents a majority of the population, not only a minority of individuals who vote. This helps ensure that governments do not neglect sections of society that are less active politically, and victorious political leaders of compulsory systems may potentially claim greater political legitimacy than those of non-compulsory systems with lower voter turnout.
  
• 
  Mandatory voting would reduce polarization. William Galston, senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution. "Mandatory voting would loosen partisan gridlock." US News and World Report. July 8th, 2010: "My prediction, based on the difference between voters and nonvoters in the United States today, is that it would reduce political polarization."
  
• 
  Mandatory voting decreases need for big dollars in campaigns. Because mandatory voting means that no large campaign funds are needed to goad voters to the polls, the role of money in politics will decrease.
  
• 
  Mandatory voting would compel broader campaign messaging. William Galston, senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution. "Mandatory voting would loosen partisan gridlock." US News and World Report. July 8th, 2010: "Campaigns wouldn't have to spend nearly as much time on voter mobilization, nor would they be able to target their message simply to the most passionate partisan members of the electorate. They'd have to craft broader and more inclusive messages. That would be all to the good."
  
• 
  Compulsory voting reduces power of lobbying groups. A benefit of compulsory voting is that it makes it more difficult for special interest groups to vote themselves into power. Under a non-compulsory voting system, if fewer people vote then it is easier for smaller sectional interests and lobby groups to control the outcome of the political process. The outcome of the election reflects less the will of the people (Who do I want to lead the country?) but instead reflects who was logistically more organized and more able to convince people to take time out of their day to cast a vote (Do I even want to vote today?).
  
• 
  Compulsory voting decreases risk of political instability. High levels of participation decreases the risk of political instability created by crises or dangerous but charismatic leaders.
  
• 
  Mandatory voting more impactful than making voting easier
  

• 
  Mandatory voting does not enhance legitimacy of govt. Even if compulsory voting allows for abstention, legitimacy is not improved. It merely allows the government to say 'because there is a 100% turnout, this government is 100% legitimate', which is clearly not the case. Donkey votes, random votes, "just for the fun of it" votes, protest votes and abstentions do NOT contribute to improved legitimacy of the government. There is a reason why some people are less politically active. They neither know nor care about politics. How can their forced input add legitimacy to the mix?
  
• 
  Mandatory voting pushes ignorant to vote Some individuals resent the idea of compulsory voting, particularly if they have no interest in politics or no knowledge of the candidates. Others may be well-informed, but have no preference for any particular candidate, and have no wish to give support to the incumbent political system. Such people may vote at random simply to fulfill legal requirements: the so called donkey-vote may account for 1-2% of votes in these systems, which may affect the electoral process. Similarly, citizens may vote with a complete absence of knowledge of any of the candidates, or deliberately skew their ballot to slow the polling process or disrupt the election.
  
• 
  Not voting is often a form of political expression. Supporters of voluntary voting assert that low voter participation in a voluntary election is not necessarily an expression of voter dissatisfaction or general political apathy. It may be simply an expression of the citizenry's political will, indicating satisfaction with the political establishment in an electorate. Mark Latham urged Australians to hand in blank votes for the 2010 election. He stated the government should not force citizens to vote or threaten them with a fine.
  
• 
  Mandatory voting may increase hold of established parties "The case against compulsory voting in democracies." Helium: "the political system in America is concentrated in two parties, with only minor successes of alternate parties. These two parties, as opposed to eight competitive parties in Australia, spend millions of dollars annually encouraging their members to vote in elections. With the implementation of compulsive voting, the political parties would instead spend those millions trying to convince non-party members of the superiority of their respective positions. Instead of saving money, the two parties would only increase in power as more members join their folds, reducing the power of smaller parties to democratically compete."
  
• 
  Compulsory voting expands government, limits freedom. "The Case against Compulsory Voting." Musings. January 16th, 2010: "compulsory voting will require processes and man power to ensure adherence. It’s a massive expansion of government and hence a colossal waste of tax payers money."
  
• 
  Forcing a vote is as bad for democracy as poor turnout. Debra Saunders. "The trouble with compulsory voting." Real Clear Politics. July 13th, 2010: "I do recognize that a low turnout in elections lends itself to questions about the legitimacy of those elected – and indeed, in the institutions themselves. But if we are 'forced to be free' (and I’m using that in not quite the way Rousseau did, though if his assertion that we are only truly free when electing our representatives is correct, then it follows) then the legitimacy that we are bestowing upon those who represent us appears to be artificial and manufactured at best."
  

1. 
   Distinguish between a right and a responsibility
   

2. 
   List the arguments for and against compulsory voting
   

3. 
   According to this document, which do you agree with and why?
   

Former ABC reporter John Stossel examines whether or not voting should be mandatory.

1. 
   According to the video and your opinion why is it important for young people to vote?
   

2. 
   Compare and contrast the political knowledge of young people and adults.
   

3. 
   According to the video and your opinion is it our civic duty to vote?
   

Burns, James MacGregor; J. W. Peltason; and Thomas E. Cronin, Government by the People, 21st ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2005

1. 
   According to the chart, does compulsory voting affect voter turnout?
   

2. 
   Which countries have the best voter turnout? Which have the least?
   

3. 
   If voting was compulsory in the United States do you think it would help or hinder voter turnout? Explain.
   

i.e., contributions of classical Rome and Greece, design and architecture…

i.e., URL, author, title of book and date of publication, …

Resource gave no new information that I could use.

As a guide for former research.

As a direct source of information

• 
  exceptional clarity, focus, and control in development and organization that often shows insight.
  
• 
  in-depth and/or creative exploration of the topic using rich, relevant, and credible details.
  
• 
  a strong, perhaps creative, beginning, and a satisfying conclusion.
  
• 
  specifically and carefully chosen words that are skillfully crafted into phrases and sentences that enhance meaning.
  
• 
  intentional and committed interaction between the writer and the reader.
  
• 
  effective and/or creative use of a wide range of conventions with few errors.
  

• 
  insightful with no historical errors.
  
• 
  makes original and specific connections using resources.
  
• 
  relies on a variety of the documents and includes outside resources, all of which are cited correctly
  
• 
  uses background knowledge for all support content.
  
• 
  thesis is prompt-driven and fits seamlessly in opening paragraph.
  

• 
  clarity, focus, and control in topic development and organization
  
• 
  a balanced and thorough explanation of the topic using relevant details.
  
• 
  an inviting beginning and a satisfying sense of closure.
  
• 
  a broad range of carefully chosen words crafted into phrases and varied sentences that sound natural.
  
• 
  awareness of the reader and commitment to the audience and topic.
  
• 
  effective use of a wide range of
  
• 
  conventions with few errors.
  

• 
  accurate, may contain only minor historical errors.
  
• 
  makes obvious connections using relevant resources.
  
• 
  appropriately relies on a variety of the documents and may use outside sources, all of which are cited correctly
  
• 
  uses background knowledge consistently.
  
• 
  includes clear thesis statement in the opening paragraph.
  

• 
  ideas adequately developed with a clear and coherent presentation of ideas with order and structure that can be formulaic.
  
• 
  relevant details that are sometimes general or limited; organization that is clear, but sometimes predictable.
  
• 
  a recognizable beginning and ending, although one or both may be somewhat weak.
  
• 
  effective word choice that is functional and, at times, shows interaction between writer and audience.
  
• 
  somewhat varied sentence structure with good control of simple constructions a natural sound.
  
• 
  control of standard conventions although a wide range is not used; errors that do not impede readability.
  

• 
  accurate, may contain only minor historical errors.
  
• 
  makes connections using some resources.
  
• 
  uses background knowledge at occasionally.
  
• 
  cites multiple documents correctly
  
• 
  thesis statement is clear.
  

• 
  broad or simplistic ideas that are understood but often ineffective.
  
• 
  attempts at organizing that are inconsistent or ineffective; beginnings and endings that are underdeveloped; repetitive transitional devices.
  
• 
  developmental details that are uneven, somewhat predictable, or leave information gaps; details not always placed effectively in the writing.
  
• 
  reliance on clichés and overused words that do not connect with the reader; limited audience awareness.
  
• 
  monotonous and sometime misused words; sentences may sound mechanical, although simple constructive are usually correct.
  
• 
  limited control of standard conventions with significant errors.
  

• 
  Historically accurate but overly general
  
• 
  loosely makes connections to some resources.
  
• 
  uses background knowledge/facts with some connections.
  
• 
  includes a thesis, though it is not very clear.
  
• 
  cites multiple documents correctly
  

• 
  overly simplistic and sometimes unclear ideas that have insufficiently developed details.
  
• 
  sequencing of ideas that is often just a list; missing or ineffective details that require reader and inference to comprehend and follow.
  
• 
  missing beginning and/or ending.
  
• 
  repetitive, monotonous, and often misused words awkwardly strung into sentences that are difficult to read because they are either choppy or rambling; many sentences that begin with repetitive noun + verb pattern.
  
• 
  lack of audience awareness.
  
• 
  little control of basic conventions resulting in errors impeding readability.
  

• 
  Contains multiple historical errors
  
• 
  uses more than one document correctly but relies on one document OR cites only one document
  
• 
  loosely uses background knowledge/facts with no connections.
  
• 
  includes a general topic statement, but not a thesis
  

• 
  lack of purpose or ideas and sequencing.
  
• 
  organization that obscures the main point.
  
• 
  an attempt that is too short to offer coherent development of an idea, if it is stated.
  
• 
  extremely limited vocabulary that shows no commitment to communicating a message.
  
• 
  sentences with confusing word order that may not permit oral reading.
  
• 
  severe and frequent errors in conventions.
  

• 
  has significant historical misinterpretation.
  
• 
  no documents are internally cited
  
• 
  no apparent thesis or topic statement.
  

• 
  exceptional clarity, focus, and control in development and organization that often shows insight.
  
• 
  in-depth and/or creative exploration of the topic using rich, relevant, and credible details.
  
• 
  a strong, perhaps creative, beginning, and a satisfying conclusion.
  
• 
  specifically and carefully chosen words that are skillfully crafted into phrases and sentences that enhance meaning.
  
• 
  intentional and committed interaction between the writer and the reader.
  
• 
  effective and/or creative use of a wide range of conventions with few errors.
  

• 
  insightful with no historical errors.
  
• 
  makes original and specific connections using resources.
  
• 
  relies on a variety of the documents and includes outside resources, all of which are cited correctly
  
• 
  uses background knowledge for all support content.
  
• 
  thesis is prompt-driven and fits seamlessly in opening paragraph.
  

• 
  clarity, focus, and control in topic development and organization
  
• 
  a balanced and thorough explanation of the topic using relevant details.
  
• 
  an inviting beginning and a satisfying sense of closure.
  
• 
  a broad range of carefully chosen words crafted into phrases and varied sentences that sound natural.
  
• 
  awareness of the reader and commitment to the audience and topic.
  
• 
  effective use of a wide range of
  
• 
  conventions with few errors.
  

• 
  accurate, may contain only minor historical errors.
  
• 
  makes obvious connections using relevant resources.
  
• 
  appropriately relies on a variety of the documents and may use outside sources, all of which are cited correctly
  
• 
  uses background knowledge consistently.
  
• 
  includes clear thesis statement in the opening paragraph.
  

• 
  ideas adequately developed with a clear and coherent presentation of ideas with order and structure that can be formulaic.
  
• 
  relevant details that are sometimes general or limited; organization that is clear, but sometimes predictable.
  
• 
  a recognizable beginning and ending, although one or both may be somewhat weak.
  
• 
  effective word choice that is functional and, at times, shows interaction between writer and audience.
  
• 
  somewhat varied sentence structure with good control of simple constructions a natural sound.
  
• 
  control of standard conventions although a wide range is not used; errors that do not impede readability.
  

• 
  accurate, may contain only minor historical errors.
  
• 
  makes connections using some resources.
  
• 
  uses background knowledge at occasionally.
  
• 
  cites multiple documents correctly
  
• 
  thesis statement is clear.
  

• 
  broad or simplistic ideas that are understood but often ineffective.
  
• 
  attempts at organizing that are inconsistent or ineffective; beginnings and endings that are underdeveloped; repetitive transitional devices.
  
• 
  developmental details that are uneven, somewhat predictable, or leave information gaps; details not always placed effectively in the writing.
  
• 
  reliance on clichés and overused words that do not connect with the reader; limited audience awareness.
  
• 
  monotonous and sometime misused words; sentences may sound mechanical, although simple constructive are usually correct.
  
• 
  limited control of standard conventions with significant errors.
  

• 
  Historically accurate but overly general
  
• 
  loosely makes connections to some resources.
  
• 
  uses background knowledge/facts with some connections.
  
• 
  includes a thesis, though it is not very clear.
  
• 
  cites multiple documents correctly
  

• 
  overly simplistic and sometimes unclear ideas that have insufficiently developed details.
  
• 
  sequencing of ideas that is often just a list; missing or ineffective details that require reader and inference to comprehend and follow.
  
• 
  missing beginning and/or ending.
  
• 
  repetitive, monotonous, and often misused words awkwardly strung into sentences that are difficult to read because they are either choppy or rambling; many sentences that begin with repetitive noun + verb pattern.
  
• 
  lack of audience awareness.
  
• 
  little control of basic conventions resulting in errors impeding readability.
  

• 
  Contains multiple historical errors
  
• 
  uses more than one document correctly but relies on one document OR cites only one document
  
• 
  loosely uses background knowledge/facts with no connections.
  
• 
  includes a general topic statement, but not a thesis
  

• 
  lack of purpose or ideas and sequencing.
  
• 
  organization that obscures the main point.
  
• 
  an attempt that is too short to offer coherent development of an idea, if it is stated.
  
• 
  extremely limited vocabulary that shows no commitment to communicating a message.
  
• 
  sentences with confusing word order that may not permit oral reading.
  
• 
  severe and frequent errors in conventions.
  

• 
  has significant historical misinterpretation.
  
• 
  no documents are internally cited
  
• 
  no apparent thesis or topic statement.