Thailand's election lottery seen as good idea

The Nation, Asia News Network, Bangkok

House Speaker Uthai Pimchaichon's proposal that the EC hold an election lottery to encourage people to vote is unprecedented and has all the hallmarks of a supermarket sales gimmick. Nevertheless, it should be given some serious thought because at its heart, democracy is nothing without participation. Uthai suggested the Election Commission spend some Bt140 million on cash prizes to be awarded to voters as a way of luring them to the polling stations.

The speaker reasoned that the commission typically spends more than Bt400 million on voter-awareness campaigns -- usually to no avail. "People still go the polls in low numbers: They're tired of voting," Uthai said.

"The EC should launch an election lottery, with a first prize of Bt100,000 and second prize of Bt20,000. This is not an attempt to encourage vice -- it will give people some motivation to vote and prevent the problem of their rights being abused by cheaters," he said.

Voter turnout is certainly an issue that needs addressing. While the last election saw a healthy participation rate of 70 percent, the turnout in the secondary rounds of voting and in by- elections has generally been dismal, falling to as low as 20 percent in some provinces. On the first day of advance voting in the Samut Prakan Senate by-election last Sunday, only a few hundred people showed up to cast ballots. Samut Prakan has 700,000 eligible voters.

The main criticism of promising people a reward for voting is that it runs contrary to democratic principles; mainly that the right to cast a ballot should be regarded as a privilege in itself, one that needs to be jealously guarded and that should not be taken lightly. It is an argument that is similar to the main criticism of compulsory voting; that people who can't be bothered to vote shouldn't be forced to: They deserve the government that they subsequently get.

That line of thinking would seem to make sense, except of course, there is plenty about elections in Thailand that doesn't respond to democracy as it is thought of elsewhere. Voter participation is a case in point. The provinces with the highest turnout rates, in some areas close to 100 percent, are those peopled by voters who have received the least from the democratic system: the poor of the Northeast and the North.

It is a mistake, however, to dismiss the votes of upcountry people as meaningless because the voter might have accepted money to go to the polling booth. As many unsuccessful candidates can attest, paying for votes is no guarantee of electoral success. The candidate also needs to show he can deliver something to the local community.

Similarly, in countries where voting is compulsory, such as Australia and in several European countries, advocates of the system argue that once people are forced to make the effort to vote they do give their decision serious thought and don't simply donkey-drop the ballot.

Finally, it should not be forgotten that while democracy is a serious business, there is no reason why elections should not be fun. Campaigns should be entertaining, policy debates should be vigorous and inclusive, and election day should be festive.

If the end result is an election people take part in and talk about, then Uthai's idea may well be worth trying.