Should you have to pass a competency test to vote?

[Tulkas12]

Yea, this is a flawed concept imo. Just be happy that 60% of population doesn't vote, because if they did it would be a one party system and that wopuld be scary indeed.

 

[.Shane.]

Why stop at the vote?

I think we need to license people for opinions per subject matter. I explained this in more detail a while ago, I'll see if I can dig up my original post, rather than repeat myself.

 

[Tulkas12]

Why stop at the vote?

I think we need to license people for opinions per subject matter. I explained this in more detail a while ago, I'll see if I can dig up my original post, rather than repeat myself.

No, absolutely not. I can have an opinion on athletes in the MLB, having never worked in the field before. I have heard this thought as well, and it is just as silly as the OP.

 

[nihilistic]

Bonehead remarks? You're the one who's fooling youself by being incredulous. The word isn't rediculous, although I can admit your reasoning can proprely be described as such.

Taken from dictionary.com

in·cred·u·lous ( P ) Pronunciation Key (n-krj-ls)
adj.
Skeptical; disbelieving: incredulous of stories about flying saucers.
Expressive of disbelief: an incredulous stare.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[From Latin incrdulus : in-, not; see in-1 + crdulus, believing; see credulous.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
in·credu·lous·ly adv.
in·credu·lous·ness n.

Can you point out where I was being "incredulous" if you are going to call me names?

Also, for someone who like to pull the dictionary so much, you spelled the word "ridiculous" incorrectly.

First of all, all American citizens are required to pay taxes. Federal law.

I don't think anyone is arguing that. No need for grandstanding man.

You do not pay taxes until you turn 18, hence the huge refund you get when you are a minor with a job, ergo you are not a citizen, ergo you do not have the right to vote.

There are so many thins wrong with this it's really not funny. First of all, the social security refunds are based on your earnings and salaries, so it isn't a 'payback' for your voting rights during the first 18 years of life. Secondly, minors are citizens no matter how loudly or rudely you say they aren't. Third, learn to look stuff up before you yell at your opponent(s) for "getting them wrong". Go ahread, look them up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Citizenship

I suggest you read up a little in an American Government textbook.

You are so precious.

 

[nihilistic]

You are arguing for the idea that we ought to limit the field of the populace who can vote, when participation in government is a right, not a a priveledge. Obviously, this is an attempt to produce 'better' results in elections, thus you propose giving up an essenital freedom to gain security from those who would be considered 'bad voters,' ie those who would not pass this voting test.

Ok, I get the 'freedom' part, now where is the 'security' part? Besides, I was merely arguing that the practice if enacted would be legal and constitutional. Also, we are talking about very basic tests. I think it is not unfair to say that people who don't know the basics of how our government works aren't likely to be 'good voters'.

Afterall, "an informed citizenry is the basis of a democracy". I'm too lazy to look up who said that.

 

[malclave]

A few questions that should be answered before someone can vote are...

1) How many states are in the USA?

Fifty.

2) As an American citizen, your rights are explained and guaranteed by what bill?

None. A bill does not have the force of law. Only once a bill has been passed by the appropriate legislative body (bicameral in the federal government and most states, unicameral in one state IIRC) and signed by the appropriate executve authority, does the language of a bill become law.

3) The two major political parties are _____ and _____?

In the current national political landscape, the Democratic Party and the G.O.P.

4) There are how many Justices of the Supreme Court?

Nine.

5) What is the US capital?

The seat of the U.S. government.

6) July 4th is what US holiday?

Independence Day.

7) Did you complete this form in English, without aid?

Yes. (I almost googled my answer in #2 to confirm my recollection that the state with a unicameral legislature is Nebraska, but stopped at the last minute so I could answer this question "yes".)

I believe #4 is the least important question, but #s 7 and 2 are the most important questions to be asked.

I don't understand why these questions should matter; I do not believe there should be a test to vote... especially #3, which is completely unrelated to U.S. law, and #7, since the U.S. does not require literacy in English for citizens.

But, if there is a test, answering "Bill of Rights" in #2 should disqualify someone from voting. Because a bill, in the legislative sense, is significantly different than a list of amendments.

 

[Stylesjl]

I'm not an American citizen and yet i passed every question instantly except for number 4

I don't think testing voters is a good idea, it opens the door to abuse

 

[Mr. Blonde]

Several problems with that:

1) The test is open to abuse: who will ultimately decide which questions are asked? Those in power. Will they look for ways that voters from their competitors fail these tests? Yes

2) The government will lose legitimacy in the eyes of those who are excluded from voting. They would have less initiative to be law abiding.

3) How does knowing or not knowing for instance that the US has 50 states make your opinion on what candidate/party to vote for valid or invalid? I don´t really see a connection there.

 

[Grisu]

I don't think testing voters is a good idea, it opens the door to abuse

exactly, it's just one more power that can be abused, if you can disallow people to vote through a test.

after all we could make a question: "Which candidate would you vote for?"
And only the "correct" answers would be allowed to vote

 

[IglooDame]

First of all, all American citizens are required to pay taxes. Federal law. You do not pay taxes until you turn 18, hence the huge refund you get when you are a minor with a job, ergo you are not a citizen, ergo you do not have the right to vote.
I suggest you read up a little in an American Government textbook.

Friend, I think it is you that needs the American Government textbook.

Minors certainly might pay taxes - sales tax, capital gains tax, and yes, even income taxes. Look here and tell me where it says "You're under 18, no taxes for you!" I think you're confusing tax-exempt with dependent status. You get a huge refund when you're a minor with a job because minors with jobs very rarely make enough money to be on the "owing the Feds" side of the IRS' balance sheet, what with having to attend school and all.

 

[.Shane.]

Let me make a better test.

1. Who was the primary writer of the Declaration of Independence?

2. Who was the primary architect of the US Constitution?

3. What are the 3 primary branches of the US government?

4. What are "checks and balances"? Give 1 example of how this manifests itself in our government.

5. What is the process for passing an amendment to the US Constitution?

6. What is the difference between "broad" and "narrow" construction? Bonus points for indicating which aspect of the Constitution their representative supporters use to justify their viewpoint.

7. Put these presidents in order of when they served: Lincoln, Washington, Reagan, F. Roosevelt, T. Roosevelt.

8. Name your Congressman.

9. Name your State Assembly representative.

10. Name the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and 2 other Justices.

 

[.Shane.]

No, absolutely not. I can have an opinion on athletes in the MLB, having never worked in the field before. I have heard this thought as well, and it is just as silly as the OP.

Sure you can have an opinion, but if my MLB knowledge score is higher than yours I can legally tell you to STFU or you'll go to jail.

 

[Cu Chulainn]

Intelligence can't be measured, nor can one's man's opinion be shown to be worth more than another's. A test would be terrible, we are not in a position to determine those who have a right to vote.

Absolutely incorrect. The opinion of a molecular biologist is worth far more than mine when discussing molecular biology. An uninformed opinion is always worth less than an informed one. If you don't know what you're voting for should you really be voting? I think that people who cant be bothered to research candidates are one of the biggest problems with this country. Second only to "Hot" issue voters. Would that they'd all just stay home! I'd prefer a ballot that was simply a pollitical opinion test that would recommend the candidate that most matched the voter's views.

 

[Aegis]

It's a Democracy, not an oligarchy

Actually, the U.S. is a Constitutional Republic. Just for future reference. =o)

 

[The Yankee]

Absolutely incorrect. The opinion of a molecular biologist is worth far more than mine when discussing molecular biology. An uninformed opinion is always worth less than an informed one. If you don't know what you're voting for should you really be voting? I think that people who cant be bothered to research candidates are one of the biggest problems with this country. Second only to "Hot" issue voters. Would that they'd all just stay home! I'd prefer a ballot that was simply a pollitical opinion test that would recommend the candidate that most matched the voter's views.

Such a system would take away the choice of the voter, which is the whole point of voting. If some people value certain issues more than others, who are we to say that they're incorrect and have the legal force to back it up?

 

[Tulkas12]

Sure you can have an opinion, but if my MLB knowledge score is higher than yours I can legally tell you to STFU or you'll go to jail.

What, when did jail come into this? Legally tell me to stfu? Wth?

If your in the feild your opinion is worth more than mine I'd agree, but I can still hold my opinion.

 

[Tulkas12]

Absolutely incorrect. The opinion of a molecular biologist is worth far more than mine when discussing molecular biology. An uninformed opinion is always worth less than an informed one. If you don't know what you're voting for should you really be voting? I think that people who cant be bothered to research candidates are one of the biggest problems with this country.

It is worth more but it does not make your opinion invalid by any stretch. Imo it is the right of the ignorant to vote, just thank goodness most don't or like I said earlier, we'd be in a one party system. . . geuss which party. . .

 

[Winner]

Every election year in America there is a spat of "get out the vote" advertisments on TV, radio, papers, and anywhere else they can stick them. All this advertising to vote, but no advertising to actually educate yourself before you do vote. What good is it to say "I'm voting for Bush/Kerry because my mom is"?

I believe the country would be in much better shape if we, as a whole, learned about the political situation prior to voting. Bush likely never would've been elected, he would not have even gotten the nomination from the GOP I bet, and Kerry certainly wouldn't have been running against him. If we were educated and we could weed out the morons and the liars, we'd have a much stronger field of future leaders, like Colin Powell and Joe Lieberman. A few questions that should be answered before someone can vote are...

1) How many states are in the USA?
2) As an American citizen, your rights are explained and guaranteed by what bill?
3) The two major political parties are _____ and _____?
4) There are how many Justices of the Supreme Court?
5) What is the US capital?
6) July 4th is what US holiday?
7) Did you complete this form in English, without aid?

I believe #4 is the least important question, but #s 7 and 2 are the most important questions to be asked. If anyone cannot answer these questions without googling it or asking someone, you should not be voting in the US.

Thoughts?

Yes. I proposed this few years ago. Every citizen should do some sort of a test to determine, wheter he is able to understand the basics of politics, economics, international relations and state administration.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

An interesting idea, but I lean towards other meritocratic notions.

 

[Methos]

Technically you are not even an "American citizen" until you are 18 anyhow, so it makes sense.

Incorrect, you are a US citizen at birth.

Source

The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees citizenship at birth to almost all individuals born in the United States or in U.S. jurisdictions, according to the principle of jus soli.