Intuition might suggest that automatic registration and voluntary voting could lead to a higher voter turnout among young people; in turn, young people, inherently more idealistic than their elders, may push for policies that provide greater comfort to the lower classes. Unfortunately, international experience indicates otherwise.
The voluntary voting harms families with fewer resources. In countries where voluntary voting has been implemented, this has meant, on average, a lower turnout by citizens with fewer resources. It is noteworthy that lower-income individuals vote in a smaller proportion compared to high income, on the other hand, if compulsory voting is accompanied by a real fine, the fine represents a greater incentive to vote for lower-income citizens that for high income. As a result of the above, the governments of countries introducing voluntary voting, end up spending less on social policies with regard to countries with compulsory voting. Matta (2009) [1] , on careful study and evidence from 70 countries, concludes that countries with voluntary voting, spend 14% less total expenditure government social spending (with respect to countries that have compulsory voting). The results of this study are consistent with other studies such as Chong and Olivera (2008).
We ad-slides a very important decision for the future of our social policies. On Wednesday, 6 January, the President sent Congress draft legislation on that automatic enrollment and voluntary voting. Given the comments above, I think the best option from a social point of view is: automatic enrollment, mandatory voting.
[1] Matta, Juan José (2009). The Effect of Compulsory Voting on Redistributive Policy: Theory and Evidence for a Cross Section of Countries. Master's thesis, Catholic University, Institute of Economics.
