I find the "motivation to vote" problem a really interesting one from an economics perspective. The marginal effect of one vote in a federal election is statistically indistinguishable from zero. How do you motivate rational agents to undertake an action with nonzero costs for zero marginal benefit?
In real life, the reasons for voting are soft and squishy, and millions of people vote, so this problem does not immediately seem serious. But I wonder, if you imagine a hypothetical system where every person acted purely rationally, how could you create a political system where voting made sense on a personal level, rather than out of some nebulous sense of civic duty?
The most obvious answer is to make voting compulsory as Australia does. I wonder if there are any other solutions?
I have suggested a one-in-a-million chance to win one million dollars. Voters would receive a voting stub that was also a sweepstakes entry. Just take the number of voters, divide by a million, round up, and award that many $1 million prizes.
The cost of running an election is perhaps in the $2/voter range, so this would increase costs by 50%. Publicizing the names of the winners - "Bob Smith won $1 million - for voting!" - would go a long way toward increasing voter turnout, I expect.
In real life, the reasons for voting are soft and squishy, and millions of people vote, so this problem does not immediately seem serious. But I wonder, if you imagine a hypothetical system where every person acted purely rationally, how could you create a political system where voting made sense on a personal level, rather than out of some nebulous sense of civic duty?
The most obvious answer is to make voting compulsory as Australia does. I wonder if there are any other solutions?