Voter turnout in America is lower than the resonating voice of James Earl Jones. So low, in fact, that it might very well cause an Englishman to wonder what our revolution was all about. ‘What the bloody hell did those wankers spend so much blood and treasure for,’ he might wonder. I am wondering the same thing myself.

Although voting rights now extend to a great many more people than they did after the war, this country truly was founded for the vote. Yes, the Boston Massacre and the stamp tax might be what we remember most as Revolutionary causes, but the overarching cause was the yearn for a participatory democracy. Over time, however, it seems that a substantial percentage of Americans have forgotten this. Whether due to the perception of a meaningless vote or a forever incapable government — or likely both — a whole heap of Americans do choose to not vote.

While the last two presidential elections have seen a rise in turnout, there is clearly still a great amount of room for improvement in a country which flaunts its “No. 1 Democracy” claim throughout the world. The claim is as false as George Washington’s teeth. According to the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, the United States ranks 139 in eligible voter turnout average since 1945. Granted, the results are skewed — due to the fact that we have held many more elections than any of the other countries and many new democracies may tend to coerce voting or over report turnout successes — but they should still be an embarrassment to a country which, after not finding weapons of mass destruction, claimed it was in Iraq to spread democracy.

Just this past Sunday, President Bush spoke at the National Endowment for Democracy, calling for a “global democratic revolution.” Addressing Iraq, he stated that “Freedom is worth fighting for, dying and standing for, and the advance of freedom leads to peace.” Clearly, democracy is the only leg that Bush has left to stand on. Joseph Nye, former dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, agreed, commenting that Bush “is trying to put a democracy blanket over his Iraq policies.”

I support a free and democratic Iraq myself, but when we not only fight an unjust war abroad but also do not commit ourselves to democracy-in-practice at home, these words should bring laughs from the international community. Sure our Declaration and our Constitution commit our nation to democracy, but without practicing it, what’s the use?

After spewing this doom and gloom, the immediate question is: What can we do?

One possibility is to mandate and impose voting on a national scale. In Australia, voting as law has caused roughly 90 percent of voting age citizens to vote regularly. And what about the 10 percent of eligible Aussies who don’t vote? No, they aren’t thrown into the bush or forced to cage fight kangaroos — which I’d love to see — but are simply fined $30.

While this isn’t a great financial hit, even in today’s economy, many American nonvoters would continue to not vote. More importantly, any form of mandatory voting, even if 100 percent effective, should leave a bad taste in one’s mouth. Addressing this, Kim Smith, professor in the Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication, said that “it’s better for democracy if you don’t go into the booth and make a completely random decision,” because you are forced to, but instead vote because “you are informed of the candidates and can make an educated decision.”

Essentially, if you must be forced to vote in order to vote, you probably aren’t the type of person for which American democracy calls. Thus, while mandatory voting may be fine and dandy for Australia — a continent first populated by Britain’s castoffs — let’s remember: It would be an embarrassment in the United States.

Yet our low turnout is just that — an embarrassment. So let’s try a second option: a Voting Day national holiday. We could even shift Veterans Day to Voting Day so that workplaces would not lose productivity and we could thank veterans for their preservation of American democracy.

Although I wish I could take credit for the idea, it’s not even close to new. John Kerry and Hillary Clinton introduced legislation supporting the idea in 2001 and again in 2005. It obviously did not pass — seen by Republicans as an attempt to create a Democratic advantage by ensuring the voting of all Democrat-heavy federal employees — and this is just as well.

There is some support, however, as Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication Director Michael Bugeja says “pundits believe in the ‘throw ‘em out’ myth, that voters will get so angry they will flock to the polls — especially on a holiday — to make things right again.” He does not believe in this mindset, however, saying that “I believe voter turnout will improve [only] when we get candidates that inspire us.” The hypothetical Voting Day would clearly not further the creation of such candidates.

Furthermore, as with mandatory voting, a holiday would make voting seem like something done in exchange for a day off rather than a civic duty. It would, above all, likely be impractical, Smith notes, saying that it “wouldn’t make much difference” in turnout and would only invite more uninformed voters to make uninformed choices — the type of voters, again, that our country does not need.

Clearly, then, neither of the above options look very promising. American democracy does not simply call for high voter turnout. If it did, we could just report false numbers. No, American democracy calls for high informed voter turnout, with informed being the operative word.

Yet, there is hope. No, I possess no policy panacea which will turn Americans out in droves — although registration increases are always a good thing — but rather a sign of hypothetical hope based directly on what may very well happen just three weeks from today.

— Steve Adams is a graduate student in political science from Annapolis, Md.