By definition, citizens of democratic countries are granted the right to vote and elect leaders who they believe can best represent the political ideologies of the people; but what if portions of the electorate didn't vote, resulting in an unbalanced government with unequal representation? This disastrous scenario could easily be resolved with compulsory voting, also called compulsory voting. Although compulsory voting may be difficult to enforce and may violate the rights of citizens who do not wish to vote, a compulsory voting plan should be implemented in every democratic government because it broadens representation in government, ensures true democracy, and decreases the risk of political instability. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay While opponents argue that compulsory voting might be difficult to enforce, there is actually a simple solution. As other plans to increase voter turnout have failed, it has become clear that the only way to impose compulsory voting and ensure that voters go to the polls on election day is to impose a small penalty, such as a fine of between 15 and 20 dollars. $100. Of course, any new measure requires resources to implement, and in this case detractors of compulsory voting point to the “waste” of these resources in an “unnecessary” logistical problem as a reason to oppose this plan. These critics might say that these funds could be used in other “more meaningful” contexts, such as the health and education sectors, rather than being allocated for the purpose of ensuring that every citizen voted. However, while the administrative barrier of compulsory voting could prove to be a major obstacle to overcome, with a properly set penalty, this strategy would pay for itself and perhaps even generate revenue for the government! Another argument against compulsory voting is based on the premise that portions of the electorate may often be misinformed about politics and therefore, if compulsory voting were implemented, these citizens would influence the polls unfavorably. Proponents of this argument suggest that ignorant voters could harm their country's future, as they may be too easily influenced by external influences, such as corruption or manipulation, rather than by the politician's ideologies and relevant experience. However, compulsory voting could actually push citizens to educate themselves and inform themselves about political issues before Election Day. Indeed, compulsory voting has great potential to involve voters in civic or political affairs concerning the country, creating a more politically informed electorate. This, in turn, would reduce the risk of political instability: educated citizens would be able to make their own decisions, rather than being easily controlled or influenced by manipulative politicians. If citizens were forced to vote, they would take this responsibility more seriously, resulting in fewer “donkey votes,” or votes cast by apathetic voters who just want to avoid receiving a penalty. Additionally, compulsory voting would expand representation in government. Traditionally apolitical groups, such as immigrants who do not yet feel strongly assimilated into the culture of their new country, could be excluded from the political process, meaning their concerns would not be discussed within government. Although one of the reasons why citizens may not currently feel.