Would you choose 'none of the above' on a vote ballot?

Politicians of all stripes spend a great deal of time encouraging citizens to vote. But statistics show that in both Canada and the U.S., voter turnout hovers around 60 per cent. In the past two federal elections in Canada, voter turnout was 58.8 and 61.1 per cent respectively.

In the 2008 U.S. presidential election, 63.6 per cent of eligible voters turned out to cast a ballot.

But what if one of the ballot choices were "none of the above"?

The state of Nevada put that option on the ballot in 1976 for statewide races that including everything from presidential to state Supreme Court elections. The Associated Press reports the measure was designed to counter voter apathy after the Watergate scandal forced Richard Nixon from the White House.

But this year, the option was challenged in a lawsuit by the Republican National Committee, because of "fears that 'none' could siphon votes from the Republican candidates in what are expected to be tight presidential and U.S. Senate races," reports AP.

This week, a federal three-judge panel granted an emergency stay, allowing Nevada's "none of the above" option on the vote ballot for the November presidential election. That decision overturned an earlier decision by a Nevada judge last month that the ballot option was unconstitutional.

However, even though Nevada voters have the option of voting for "none," that option can't win the election, but it can influence who does win. As AP notes,"in 1998, Democratic U.S. Sen. Harry Reid defeated then Republican Rep. John Ensign by 428 votes, but more than 8,000 voters rejected both men and opted for 'none.'"
 
What do you think? Is putting the option of "none of the above" on the ballot a good idea?