Lawmakers push voting mandate, with a fine for those who refuse
The fault lies not in us, the voters, but in the candidates on the ballot. Six members of the legislature refuse to recognize that they do not appeal to many — even most voters.
And they want to punish the public.
The six, all Democrats, formed a coalition of bullies to require voters to participate in every election. Voters who do not vote, would be notified that the government noticed. Elections officials would, according to the proposal, demand an explanation from each voter. Voters who offer an inadequate reason for not voting — or none at all — will be fined.
Reps. Brandon Chafee, Michael D’Agostino, Joshua Elliott, Anne Hughes and Geraldo Reyes, and Sen. Saud Anwar claim their propose is to “incentivize civic engagement.”
The basic elements of American democracy elude them. Voters have as much right to decline to participate in an election as they do to cast a ballot. It is one of freedom’s glories.
Anwar, to the contrary, possesses odd notions of civic engagement. He wants to compel voters to vote — but has proposed an amendment to the state constitution that would extend his term in the state Senate from two years to four. The embrace of forced civic engagement cannot compete with self-interest.
Connecticut is where the right to privacy was born. The principle has taken a battering in the past year but we, here in Connecticut, remain committed to it. No one should have to justify why they did not vote, any more than they can be compelled to announce whose name they put a mark next to on their ballot.
Imposing a fine for not participating in an election would cause some not to register to vote. Those voters who provided
no reason or one not deemed “valid” by a local official would face a fine. What would be deemed a valid reason? “There were only idiots running and I refused to encourage them.”? Would a voter who is ill, caring for a loved one or coping with debilitating grief be expected to disclose the profoundly personal details of their life to satisfy this half-dozen of blooming autocrats?
The six have mistaken coercion for engagement. If parties were to offer compelling candidates for public office, more voters would respond. In Connecticut, access to the ballot remains jealously guarded by both parties. State law constructs high hurdles for a challenger to a party favorite.
Connecticut continues to serve as the home for some of the nation’s most restrictive ballot access laws in the nation. No incumbent governor has ever faced a primary. Only one U.S. Senator has, since a primary law was enacted more than 50 years ago. That was Democrat Joseph Lieberman. He lost a 2006 primary to Ned Lamont, who dipped into his fortune and set a record (since broken by Republican Linda McMahon) financing his own campaign. Lieberman won their fall rematch that year as a petitioning candidate.
Few candidates have four generations of wealth to call upon, as Lamont does. No incumbent member of the U.S. House of Representatives has faced a primary for reelection. That is unheard of in other states because they allow candidates to get on the primary ballot by filing a declaration, maybe submitting some signatures, and perhaps paying a fee. Incumbents are regularly challenged. It’s good for them. It encourages, what is that phrase, oh yes, civic engagement.
Legislators have been congratulating themselves for months for voters approving a constitutional amendment to allow early voting. They declare there will be no voter suppression in Connecticut. When has there been? It’s long been easy to vote in Connecticut. In what Lamont once called “a small landlocked state,” polling places are not far from most voters’ home. Plenty of poll workers make the process quick and secure in most towns.
If candidates do not have a fair shot at getting on the general election ballot, voters will make the rational choice not to participate. On an essential matter of our politics, Connecticut’s political leaders want to hoard the power to choose candidates in the hands of proven party loyalists.
Statewide races are rarely close. A Republican has not won a congressional race since 2006. Many legislators face no opponent. The action is in the party nominating process — where the law discourages civic engagement. It would be easy to change: Drop the requirement to win 15% of the delegates at party conventions or collect thousands of signatures from fellow party members. Candidates file a simple declaration and a campaign begins. Voters with choices might show up — no coercion required.