This is a fundamental necessity of a citizen. If we are to practice and live with in a DEMOCRACY then in order to achieve that end we Must Be A Part Of It!! Otherwise we risk the loss of those things which we hold dear. Freedom is not FREE, nor is the exercise of keeping the representation of it easy. It was never intended to be a Free Ride. It requires our input or we shall lose it. Like any healthy relationship. If you are not there, she/he will find love elsewhere.
U.S. citizens should participate in electing government officials just as much as the President can elect government officials. The responsibility should fall on the U.S. citizens, after all, they are the ones who elected the president and senators in first place and they should have the right in say who is in the different branches of government.
If an individual does not support the principles of any of the candidates they've to choose from, should we coerce that individual into supporting them anyway by threatening their citizenship? Laws do have consequences. What would be the "punishment" for failure to comply?
One of the last forms of protest is to withdraw consent. How would one do that if their citizenship was contingent on voting for official with whom they have principled disagreements? If "freedom" is the goal, compulsory... Anything, is more than a little self-defeating.
Americans have the right to vote, but it goes both ways. We also have the right not to vote. Even if we don't vote, the U.S. Constitution still gives us the right to voice our opinions no matter what. The rights guaranteed by the constitution offer Americans a choice as to whether or not we exercise those rights. We have a right to own a gun after passing background checks at age 18, but not everyone owns a firearm. We have the right to vote at the age of 18, but not everyone chooses to vote. We have the right to consume alcohol, but not everyone drinks.
Requiring an American to participate in the democratic process of electing government officials seems un-American. We maintain the right to freely participate or to not participate. I believe people should vote, it means more voices are heard and more than likely the better candidate will be selected, but some people chose not to and they should maintain that freedom.
U.S. citizens should not be required to participate in the democratic process of electing government officials. To insist upon this would mean part of our government is totalitarian, doing elections by force of some kind. Those who wish to vote, should, and those who wish to not voice ther opinion should likewise be respected.
I believe it would be somewhat disastrous to require U.S. Citizens to participate in electing government officials. Not everyone follows politics or policy making. Many people do not ever even acquaint themselves with the candidates platforms. To require all people to vote, we would be getting quite a large number of votes based on the "I just picked one" theory.
Many individuals will argue this point saying that not voting means you do not care about the democratic process, that we "might as well be communist". They believe that it is the obligation of citizens to vote, and it's a disgrace not to.
Nothing can be farther from the truth.
First, an individual may not vote for a number of reasons. One common reason is the individual does not care or cares but feels cannot make a difference. They feel that in the past they see little to no difference between government changes and they see no reason to believe that come this election anything will be different. They may even believe that the choices they have would go against what they believe and thus see no alternative worth voting for. One may argue then, "perhaps you should become a candidate". Problem is, not everyone is cut out to be a politician, just like some are not cut out to be doctors and some may not be cut out to be farmers. The world is made of many kinds. This is actually the position I found myself in regarding a recent election, in which I did not feel the individuals representing my region were "worth" my vote, this I chose to abstain from the election. This is a legitimate position for someone to take and should be respected. To make it otherwise is to only oppress a society, not liberate.
Another reason may be the individual may be unable to vote. This is not because they are limited by an employer or oppression, but limited in ways like unable to access the nearest poll for various reasons. They may be elders unable to get out, "bedridden" or cannot afford transportation . These types of individuals should have other methods of voting made available, such as internet voting or phone, however even these suggestions may not make it possible for some individuals to engage in. These types of individuals rely on the rest of society to "make the right choice", and this too is a legitimate place to be and such individuals should not be punished.
As an Australlian, I can tell you that enforced voting is a farce. I believe in democracy and the right to choose who you vote for. But what about those in society who do not care for any of the candidates, or don't even care atall for the political direction of their country? Forcing those people to vote as happens here in Australia only results in uninformed imbeciles voting for someone because "he follows the same football team as me" or "she is hot". How are any results influenced by such trivial tripe meaningful?