In the United States of America citizens of a certain age have the right to vote. It is clearly a "right" (something that a person is entitled to) and not a "privilege"( something that a person earns or is permitted to do) though, as we all know, that right was not always extended to all American citizens. Nevertheless, many people opt not to exercise their right to vote.
There is much talk about turning Election Day into a national or federal holiday, under the assumption that more people would get out and vote. I'm pretty sure that making Election Day into a holiday isn't going to be enough incentive to get more people to the polls. To be sure, some people will in fact be encouraged to vote, but most people will not. The same thing would occur if smoking pot were legalized nation wide: some people who've never tried it would start lighting up, but most people won't- even though they'd have the right to do so.
As a matter of fact, it's more likely that if Election Day were made into a holiday, it would join the Holiday Parthenon and be reduced to nothing more than a nationally sanctioned day of partying, drinking, shopping, movie watching and gluttony. Think Fat Tuesday, only in November. (It's interesting to note that the only national holiday that does not have some sort of annual sale attached to it is Martin Luther King Day. Is it because it's too new of a holiday or is it because it would be sacrilegious to have a sale based on the ideals of Martin Luther King Jr.? Of course if that's true then one would have to ask why Christmas-a definite religious holiday- has so many sales associated with it-well beyond the traditional gift exchanges... just food for thought!)
The problem with getting more people to vote isn't an issue of giving people more time to vote. Most people live within walking distance of their polling place. Many employers will give their personnel time off the job WITH PAY to go and vote. If you're scheduled for surgery on election day, you can vote early or by absentee ballot; you can vote early or by absentee ballot for ANY reason as a matter of fact.
It goes without saying that adding another holiday into the mix would generally have a negative economic effect-TANSTAAFL-somebody has to pay for all of the lost revenue to businesses and schools that would close, (if they stayed open that would defeat the purpose of the holiday. Of course there are some places like hospitals and fire departments that never close; those employed at those places would be forced to vote absentee or early, again negating the need to have the holiday.) the overtime that would have to be paid to get people to work a holiday, and so on and so forth. Economic impact was one of the arguments against making Martin Luther King Day into an official state sanctioned holiday. Many institutions and individuals caved in under the political pressure-they didn't want to be seen as racist or insensitive to minorities after all. Racism or insensitivity aside, the bottom line is that if businesses are closed they're not making money and somebody has make up for the shortfall.
A better approach would be to give people an incentive to vote. Some countries actually fine their citizens if they dont' vote. Imagine if you had to pay $75 just for failing to vote! The best solution would be for politicians to give people something they can believe in. Politics today are more concerned with defeating the other group than actually making America a better place. It's much like going to graduate school and taking one of those courses that teaches students how to pass a particular certification exam. Whether you're a good doctor, engineer or lawyer is not as important as passing the exam.