Should voting in elections be mandatory?

Mandatory voting would increase democratic legitimacy

Question: Should voting in elections be mandatory?
Position1 of 2›: Voting should be mandatory
Argument1 of 3›: Mandatory voting would increase democratic legitimacy

The government is often not overseen by someone with a majority of votes, making it democratically illegitimate.

The argument

No political party since 1931 (under the First Past the Post electoral system) has won over half of the electorates support in a general election in the UK. The introduction of mandatory voting would increase participation making it likely that one candidate would receive a majority of the electorates support. This would address the lack of democratic legitimacy at the heart of the UK political system.

Premises

[P1]A government's democratic legitimacy depends on securing the support of a majority of the electorate. [P2] Since 1931, no UK party has won over half the electorate's support, revealing a legitimacy deficit under current voluntary turnout. [P3] Mandatory voting would raise participation enough to make majority electoral support achievable. [C] Therefore, voting should be mandatory in order to restore democratic legitimacy.

Counter-arguments

There are other ways to increase democratic legitimacy in the UK political system that would not require forcing people to vote, including introducing a proportional electoral system, devolving power to the nations and regions, and allowing the electorate a greater say in selecting the candidates for prime minister.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P3] There are more effective ways to increase democratic legitimacy.