Lijphart objective is that compulsory voting would be the best way to solve the problem of low voting turnout. He structured his argument stating two of the biggest problem with low turnout and solution to increase turnout. The first problem is that the election votes are not a representation of the overall votes towards a policy or elected official. The other problem is that certain groups vote in greater number than other groups, which show a disproportionate influence on the government and its policies. This illustrates bias states Lijphart, giving already-privileged citizens an advantage favoring their interest and the low-privileged interests are not rewarded. To solve these problems Lijphart believes that a minimum of 90 percent turnout …show more content…
However, he acknowledges that adopting all these new methods will be difficult and some states will be against it. On the other hand, Lijphart believe that combining all these methods to compulsory voting will be very effective, due to the penalties for not practicing the right to vote. He states that not only will compulsory voting increase voter turnout but it will equalize participation of all groups decreasing bias against the less-privileged. Another big advantage is reduces the incentives negative advertising. He believes that candidates attacking each other in the advertisements lower turnout because it raises doubts in people’s minds causing them not to vote. Compulsory voting will decrease the negative advertisements, which will not affect voter turnout. Although, compulsory voting does violate the individual’s freedom argues because of the freedom not to vote. This will be found unconstitutional, which will make it difficult to adopted in the U.S. The final argument Lijphart make is that other countries do not have dissent towards conservative parties in the United States. In conclusion, he believes that “compulsory voting should have been an extension of universal suffrage, which a lot of people take for