Resolved: In a democracy, voting ought to be compulsory

My opponent did not attack my rebuttal speech, therefore, by virtue of silence is compliance, he agrees with it. I will now restate my case and arguments and explain one last time why the affirmative has clearly met the burden of proof. My opponent claims that compulsory voting makes ignorant and uninformed people vote. He also claims that this is not the best way to foster a democracy. I have presented an argument for a "none of the above" option on the ballot, like Australia has. In Australia, one can even cast a blank ballot. A none of the above choice allows for people to: A) have their voices heard if they favor neither political candidate; B) express their political beliefs in a way that a democracy can interpret (Non-voters may have valid reasons for not voting, but their reasons and beliefs cannot be interpreted by the government, threatening legitimacy), and; C) not be forced to vote for a candidate when they do not have enough information to feel comfortable voting. Giving the option for people to cast a blank ballot minimalizes the liberty violation as well, while still allowing all citizens to fulfill their civic duty. My opponent also claimed that voting was irrelevant , and that protesting was the only way to achieve change in a democracy. I rebutted against this by stating a legitimate democracy (one where the voices of the majority or heard, as opposed to the few) would be able to better cater to the needs of the people, fulfilling my value of societal welfare. Finally, my opponent claimed that the system is unnecessary. This is not true; low voter turnout is an international crisis that threatens the popular sovereignty of a government. When citizens fail to vote, they fail to create a government capable of catering to the needs of the people. A government that does not hear the voices of the people cannot uphold societal welfare. I would like you to move on to my case: Contention I- Low voter turnout is an international crisis. Many democracies have pathetically low voter turnout, and compulsory voting has proven itself as a valid option to solve this issue. As stated above, a government can only cater to the needs of the people if it understands them, and popular sovereignty is necessary for the government to understand the needs of the people. Contention II- Voting is a sovereign duty that ought not be neglected. Voting is just like jury duty and obeying the law; it is necessary for societal welfare. By not voting, citizens damage the wellbeing of a democracy. I would also like to point out that my opponent never attacked this in his speech, meaning that he agrees with it. Any argument stated against my second contention will be said knowing I have no chance to rebut it. Therefore, the affirmative has clearly won on this point. My criterion was popular sovereignty, which is the doctrine that a government derives its power from the people and ought to cater to the will of the people. This paves the way for my value of societal welfare, since a government needs to understand the needs of the people to be able to uphold them, and it cannot do this when the popular sovereign remains silent. Thus, when voting, consider these points as the measures by which you judge the merit of the resolution. I would also like it to be known that this debate was in L-D format, and my opponent never presented a value or criterion, nor did he attack mine. Therefore, we must accept that the affirmative wins because the value premise has been proven. Allow me to conclude with what has been proven: 1) A none of the above option allows for citizens indifferent to politics to express their wills. 2) That compulsory voting is necessary to eliminate low voter turnout, which results in the silencing of the popular sovereign. This inhibits the government's capacity to uphold societal welfare. 3) That it is a citizen's sovereign duty to vote; to fail to do so undermines the purpose of a democracy: to create a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. We can accept that compulsory voting is indeed a government's moral obligation, since compulsory voting would absolve a democracy's issues associated with low voter turnout. And it is for these reasons and many more that I firmly yet respectfully urge a vote for the affirmative.