National elections dominate the media, social networking, and conversational hype. Support for particular candidates is seen across the nation with yard signs, car decals, shirts, billboards, commercials, and many other advertising mediums. However, despite the abundant reminders of this democratic privilege, each election voter turnout ends up being only a fraction of what it could be. For whatever reason, millions of Americans stand idly by as election day comes and goes, taking their right to vote for granted. This indifference may as well be a crime, and America should therefore implement compulsory voting.

Every citizen is affected by the outcome of national elections. It is not enough for each citizen to have an opinion–the importance lies in whether or not they voice it. If all Americans were required to vote, the election results would more accurately represent what the population wants. Since it is human nature to have an opinion, firm or not, in the current system where voting is optional, even those who don’t vote often complain of the result. Three-fourths of the population could be disgruntled when Candidate A doesn’t win, but it wouldn’t matter, because only one-fourth of the population decided to vote, and the majority of that one-fourth voted for Candidate B. Compulsory voting would decrease the number of Americans who are unhappy with the result of the election.

In addition, with the current system, only the fervent, dedicated, and loyal Americans take time out of their day to participate in the election, and therefore the results only represent that same fervent, dedicated, and loyal population. Americans shouldn’t wait until the election is over to voice their agreement or disagreement—the way some Americans often do—but rather be required to vote while their opinion can still make a difference.

Those who oppose compulsory voting might argue that it is not democratic to force Americans to do something they don’t want to do, such as vote. These Americans may not have a strong opinion or may not be informed enough to make an educated decision, and therefore opt out of the voting process.

While this argument is valid, there is an easy solution that adheres to these citizens while still requiring them to voice their opinion, or lack thereof. The government should put an option on the ballot entitled “I choose not to participate” or something of the like. This way, if Americans feel strongly about not wanting to choose any of the candidates or participate in the election, they still have a way to do so. However, by knowing they will have to go through the voting and registration process regardless, compulsory voting would increase the likelihood that these people would educate themselves and turn their apathy into an informed decision. It would also decrease the number of voters who are actually informed and willing to vote, but were too lazy to make it to the polls or could not find the time.

Admittedly, I do not have an idea of how to implement and enforce such compulsory voting. The logistics should be left to minds much smarter than mine. However, mandatory voting with an “I choose not to participate” option should be considered for all elections, not just the national ones. It is the only choice that ensures election results favorable to the majority, while maintaining—and enforcing participation in—the democracy that Americans hold true to their hearts.