Want to bet on voter turnout in November?

It’s worth considering.

Betting on voter turnout could make somebody rich, if a proposal in Arizona catches on.

The proposal is an initiative called the Arizona Voter Reward Act, and it won enough signatures in a petition drive to get a place on the state’s ballot in November.

If Arizonans approve it, everybody who votes in a state election will be entered in a random drawing for $1 million in unclaimed state lottery winnings.

The way it’s worded, the measure will take effect retroactively, meaning winners will be drawn for both the November general election and a September primary.

Mark Osterloh, a semiretired, 53-year-old eye doctor and political gadfly from Tucson, proposed it as a way of increasing interest in politics and improving voter turnout.

He promotes it with the slogan “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? Vote!”

This is not a good idea. It’s a great idea.

And like all great ideas, it has opposition.

Opponents compare it to bribery or see it as paying people to vote – a practice that was commonplace a century ago but is now against federal law.

They think it would encourage ignorant and uninformed people to vote.

Besides, they say, voting is a civic duty.

Supporters of the Voter Reward Act say the law against buying votes was meant to stop partisan shenanigans by individuals, groups and parties. The drawing would be state-approved. It wouldn’t influence the way anyone votes.

Plenty of ignorant, uninformed and misinformed people are voting anyway. Supporters say a lottery would simply get more people interested in politics – and the more people who are interested, the better it would be. Some say wider participation would have a moderating effect on campaigns, by encouraging candidates to appeal to the moderate center, where most votes would be.

Besides, they say, if voting is a duty, it ought to be encouraged. The state should work to make it easier, not harder.

In Australia, they take voting so seriously that it’s mandatory. Australians can be fined as much as $100 for not registering and voting in a national election, $20 for a local election. Voter turnout there tops 95 percent.

Fining nonvoters probably would meet resistance here. Giving everyone the chance to win a lottery is bound to be more popular.

And it would only be fair.

Politicians have been gaming the system anyway, and elections have been functioning as high-stakes lotteries.

The jackpots are awarded in the form of contracts, favors and jobs to people with the money and connections to play at that level.

A voter-reward lottery would give the average person a chance to get in on the action.

What’s wrong with that?