OK, you have to take a test to drive a car, but not to vote?

[panader0]

Sadly, ignorance is the worst enemy of the Dems. When mccone spouts his BS at the Veterans speech today, how many really know his record? How many US citizens still believe that Saddam bombed the Trade Towers? How many voters are as well informed as those here at DU? If you want to drive a car, at age 16, you must take a written and driving test, and that's after 20 hours of test driving with mom or dad. But anyone, regardless of their knowledge or ignorance of the issues, the Constitution, Their ass from a hole in ground can vote for president. I propose a test similar to the one that aspiring citizens to this nation must take. A basic knowledge of the electoral process. The separation of powers. The separation of church and state. Etc.......ARRRGGGG!!!!

[Muttocracy]

1. I'm with you - if we can figure out a way to not discriminate against people

in any unfair way, why not make people take the same test new citizens take when they get the right to vote?

[endthewar]

68. Bad idea

Has fraud potential written all over it.

[Muttocracy]

73. yeah, that's the problem. nt

[Jackpine Radical]

I wouldn't go there if I were you.

Tests of that sort were long used to exclude minority voters. Along with other interesting methods such as poll taxes.

[Skittles]

47. correct n/t

[Mike Daniels]

64. His idea would result in a large number of Democratic voters not being allowed to vote

Hell, given the state of their public education system DC would probably go Republican in a landslide if the OP's idea was put into effect.

[Jackpine Radical]

65. I imagine that's the idea.

[Mike Daniels]

70. Except that the OP appears to be a Dem since he seems to imply that DUers are more intelligent

than the general population.


Of course, he may want to rethink that theory in light of which party would be more likely to benefit from an intelligence test for prospective voters.

[dysfunctional press]

75. self delete

wrong place to reply.

[Two Americas]

2. or a tax

A poll tax would keep the riff raff away.

[Dogtown]

62. That's just

funny as hell!


:rofl:

[dbonds]

3. Legally, driving is considered a privilege and voting is a right.

While I understand some uninformed people vote, you can't require a test for them.

[2KS2KHonda]

10. True enough...and it got us 8 years of Dubya.

Must be a great system.

[dbonds]

20. That and some election fraud.

If you don't think the masses are smart enough to vote you wouldn't be the first. But it is the system we have. But you really should watch a couple BBC video series on how the populations are manipulated, Both by Adam Curtis, First is a 4 part series The Century of Self, the next is Power of Nightmares in 3 parts. You will see there is more happening than just ignorance.

[2KS2KHonda]

39. When I was a young antiwar activist in the late 1960s and knew everything

we would sit around drinking hot Dr. Pepper and ponder a nation run by a truly benevolent dictator. It generally resulted in a favorable prognosis as long as we or one of us was the dictator. How ironic that sentiment was more or less echoed by our Dear Chimp Leader.
Now where the hell is that -extremely wry grin- smilie when I need it? :D

[Sanctified]

4. No thanks, Voter intimidation is a horrible idea. n/t

[panader0]

9. Intimidation? No, basic education is not intimidation.

Do you like the idea of people driving drunk? Or voters with no clue?

[Dreamer Tatum]

12. Wait...the other side stole two elections, and you think they wouldn't game this?

Interesting.

[Sanctified]

22. There are lots of people who don't like to take tests and thus would never vote.

And what in the hell does driving drunk have anything to do with a drivers test.

[baldguy]

5. No literacy tests: Voting Rights Act of 1965

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

[tammywammy]

6. I have a Constitutional RIGHT to vote, not to drive

:eyes:

[2KS2KHonda]

11. Have you ever thought it might be better if they were reversed? I have.

:shrug:

[tammywammy]

15. No, not at all

Sorry, I don't want any form of discrimination when it comes to voting.

[2KS2KHonda]

18. Me either but I wouldn't shed any tears if the morans were divinely disenfranchised.

:-)

[tammywammy]

24. Sorry, I won't agree with you there either

All disenfranchisement is wrong. As American citizens we ALL have the RIGHT to vote. Period.

[2KS2KHonda]

26. So you wouldn't be okay with Jebus giving the morans flat tires on election day?

I think it'd be a hoot. :-)

[panader0]

30. What about a guy busted for pot ?

He can't vote. Is that discrimination?

[tammywammy]

31. In some states he can

But someone that's been convicted of a felony is quite a bit different than imposing an IQ test on voters.

[fishwax]

36. what states bar those busted for pot from voting?

There are some states where being convicted of a felony restricts your eligibility to vote. This is not true in all states, though--in other states convicted felons are eligible to vote after serving their sentence or meeting other criteria. However, I am not aware of any state that (a) takes the vote from those convicted of a misdemeanor marijuana offense or (b) treats felony marijuana convictions any differently than other felony convictions.

Incidentally, like the use of tests you advocate, such restrictions have traditionally been used to disproportionately disenfranchise minority voters.

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. See post #5

Voting is a right. Driving is a privilege.

[Two Americas]

8. lots of ways to achieve this

We could tell people the wrong locations for polling places, or limit the number of machines. We could make it more difficult to register to vote. we could toss out registrations on all sorts of technicalities. We could make the ballots more confusing. You know, in the less affluent districts where people are not as smart and are less educated.

Or, I know! we could use electronic voting machines, and then change the votes to get the desired results after the election over!

We must stop this universal suffrage idea before it destroys us. As it is now, half of the voters have an intelligence level that is below the median level. Think about that! (Since we are the smart people, I am confident that everyone can figure out what I am saying here.)

[panader0]

21. So why do we give tests to aspiring citizens?

Why not just let them be citizens with no knowledge at all about our nation. Because many in this nation have no knowledge either. This ain't some totalitarian proposal, it's common sense. A car is a 3000 pound vehicle that can cause a lot of damage. So can misinformed or brainwashed people. Why not just let people vote at 16? Or 14? or.........

[PeaceNikki]

23. You should start your own country and write your own constitution.

We already have one.

[Two Americas]

45. that is an easy one

For the same reason "we" do all of the election suppression tricks I mentioned - to keep the "undesirables" in their place. The same reason "we" stage paramilitary raids and illegally arrest and detain people suspected of a BWB* offense.

* BWB - "breathing while brown"

Is your proposal a variant on NCLB? - maybe "NVLB" - no voter left behind. We could punish districts who fail to meet certain standards, fail to have a required number of their constituents pass the test - by denying representation to those districts.

Hey we are solving us some problems now! We are so smart. Too bad we don't run the show, we'd get this joint shaped up in no time.

You are right. Those damned people are causing all of the problems and wrecking democracy. Democracy would work great if we could get rid of the people. They are mucking it all up.

By the way - the reason why people vote Republican? I know you think it is because they are all stupid and brainwashed. But a lot of it has to do with voting against aristocratic, arrogant and authoritarian attitudes such as yours, which are unfortunately all too common in modern liberalism.

[flvegan]

13. Gotta be kidding me.

[PeaceNikki]

14. Lemme see if I understand this...

You want to implement something blatantly unconstitutional because you feels people don't understand the constitution well enough?

[Two Americas]

46. ROFL!

Thanks for that.

We can see where being "intelligent" can lead? Yet the OP would have us only allow intelligent people, such as the OP, who understand the Constitution, to vote.

There are different kinds of "smarts," aren't there though? Some kinds are downright stupid.

"All people unable to prove that they are innocent will be presumed guilty and illegally arrested and detained. To keep law and order."

"All countries suspected of breaking international law will be illegally invaded and occupied. To preserve international law."

"Voters will be presumed to be too stupid to vote, until and unless they can prove otherwise. To protect the right to vote."

I am seeing a pattern emerging here.

[Dreamer Tatum]

16. Well, intelligence is correlated with income, so why not just enact a poll tax?

Oh wait...that was tried before.

[Da Fusa]

17. voting is a right, driving is a priviledge

and there were tests, once, they were used to deny blacks the right to vote.

[ret5hd]

19. I think a better idea would be a test to use the internet.

I think you would fail.

[panader0]

28. Never complain about "morans" again.

[fishwax]

25. that's a bad idea

that has already been used and abused in the past.

[scheming daemons]

27. You DO realize that you are advocating for a return of Jim Crow laws?

:eyes:

[panader0]

29. Bull! This is not about race.

[scheming daemons]

34. Any kind of "test" that could be applied to voters can be misused to discriminate against a

particular group.

Read up on Jim Crow laws.


Learn your American history, pal.

[Mike Daniels]

71. Who do you think is more likely to fail the test?

Generally, the "fails" will be people who are more likely to not have exposure to a good education or people who drop out from school.

I hate to break it to you but a bigger portion of the Democratic base is more likely to vote into those groups and a good percentage of those will be minorities.

So, your test does become about race to some degree.

[cynatnite]

32. so you want to keep people from voting...

That's exactly what you're advocating here. If they don't measure up to your ideals, then they shouldn't vote.

[Codeine]

33. Worst Idea Ever

That flies in the face of every freedom we have ever fought for in our nation's history.

[panader0]

37. Then why do people who want to become US citizens have to

take a test about the Constitution etc.? Should the mentally ill, the mentally disabled, the felons etc be allowed to vote too?
Or would that "fly in the face "?

[Codeine]

38. The mentally ill, disabled, and felons

should all, absolutely, be allowed to vote. The fact that felons are not enrages me.

As to citizenship, there is no Constitutional right to that.

[panader0]

42. Worst Idea Ever? I guess invading Iraq was better.......

[Codeine]

43. LOL!! Perhaps you have a point.

:rofl:

[Heddi]

35. Who, though, decides who is "smart enough" to vote?

Based on the last 8 years, anyone who does NOT believe that Saddam bombed the WTC would be the ones denied from voting.

While I, too, lament the fact that so many people are so grossly uniformed (and they seem to be the ones that breed the most, sadly), bigoted, ignorant, lacking any minor understanding of compassion, logic, ethics, and morals, I don't necessarily think that we should start having "purity" and "intelligent" tests before people are allowed to exercise their constitutional right to vote.

I do think that Civic and Government-based education has sucked for many years. I think that basic citizenship-type-civics should be included in any exit exam for aspiring high-school graduates. I think that there should be more of a focus on the purpose and meaning of being an American Citizen, how the government works, how it's SUPPOSED to work, and how everyone has the right to become part of that governmental system and attempt to evoke change if they so wish.

But that's not the case, and it hasn't been the case for a long time, and I cannot fault someone because the schools they went too provided a below-basic education. I cannot fault someone for being poor, and frankly not having the time or the inclination to do research on these areas. I cannot blame someone for being brought up in a family, community, and church that promotes small thinking. Not everyone has the opportunity to have their mind freed by the time they're 18. Some people take longer, and some never make that change at all.

THat being said, I do not wish to deprive people that I think are "wrong" of an inherent right. There is a very fine line between being on the right and wrong side of the issue in this country many times. I certainly would not like it if I were denied the right to vote because the person who chooses who is smart and who is dumb has a different idea of "informed voter" than I do.

[spanone]

40. i wouldn't want bu$hco making the decisions on who votes, or this supreme court or congress or???

[KharmaTrain]

41. You Can't Legislate Stupid

It's already been said that voting is a RIGHT, not a privilidge...and then who decides what constitutes an "educated" voter?

I don't know where you are at or came from, but I had to take TWO constitution tests...8th grade and then again in High School...my kids had to do the same...in order to graduate. I would imagine that a vast number of our society had to do something similar...and yet it amazes me to read here how naive or uniformed people are of how the government works.

A test doesn't show someone is smarter, just how well prepared they are. Yes, you've stepped on a slippery slope here. Want a better educated electorate? Get a better informed and serious media...not a corporate controlled one that values dead blondes and cheating husbands and cones of silence over real subtance.

[Evoman]

44. Uh huh...and rich, white people would get tutored, take special classes

and basically buy the right to vote.

Hell, maybe they would make it hard enough so YOU don't get to vote. Then the type of people that wrote the test would decide who gets to be in government.

This is elitist bullshit.

What we need to do is get MORE people to vote, not less.

[UofIDem]

48. Just out of curiosity....

Where is this right to vote that everyone is talking about? As far as I'm aware, the right to vote shall not be infringed on the basis of sex, race etc... which implies that there is, in fact, no absolute right to vote. I'm not saying that the OP has a good idea, but I am saying that I don't think it is as cut and dry as everyone makes it out to be. Otherwise, there would be an amendment to the Constitution stating simply that "The right to vote shall not be infringed."

[robcon]

49. This thread is disgusting to me.

The idea of a "test" to vote is like a poll tax. An incredibly anti-democratic idea.

[slackmaster]

55. Anyone who would even consider it has to be ignorant of history

:hi:

[rucky]

50. Paging Jim Crow...

[lumberjack_jeff]

51. How ironic.

Literacy tests, being the stupidest idea in the world, would disqualify its proponents from voting. It's like a logic-loop.

[defendandprotect]

52. A "free press" would be helpful here . . . and a true test of government commitment to voting ....

would also be helpful --- !!!


BTW . . . Should we make the Supremes pledge that they will NEVER appoint a president to the
Oval Office again --- ????

[Marr]

53. I guarantee you that tests would be used to make the situation worse, not better.

They would be used to exclude minorities and the poor.

This country is ignorant as hell and it shows in our voting-- you won't get any argument from me on that point. But the only way to correct it, if it's even possible, is to make ignorance something to be ashamed of rather than celebrated.

Our culture seems to celebrate stupidity. I see it everywhere and it always shocks me. We need a big cultural awakening here.

[slackmaster]

54. That is exactly how minority votes were suppressed from Reconstruction until the 1950s and '60s

Bad idea.

[DustyJoe]

56. What a bad idea

Where I live next to the Navajo reservation, the ballots have pictures of the candidates with room under them for a fingerprint. Why ?. A lot of older Navajos cannot read or write in English or Navajo, but are given their right to participate in the electoral process. Would anyone deny the first and most "native born" citizens this right ?. Does this mark them as not intelligent to vote ?.

[treestar]

57. There would be too many issues with the test

The only way is to try to get people better informed. That's something we need ideas on. Obviously the media is mere entertainment and has an interest in having Republicans in charge. So we need to make it look that way somehow. So that people don't take it seriously and look elsewhere for real news. Tough to do with the anti-intellectualism we have in this culture.

[Dreamer Tatum]

58. Before this gets flushed altogether...what questions would you ask?

Give me an idea of what people are suppoosed to know in order to vote.

[PVnRT]

59. Yes, let's go back to literacy tests

Nothing bad came of those.

[Doctor_J]

60. Yes, there should be a little test at the voting booth. "Is Obama a Muslim"?

If the person answers "no", or "I don't know", (s)he doesn't get to vote.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

61. Looks like you fail a basic civics test.

No vote for you.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

63. Dumb Idea.

The President is elected by the people, as is such in a democracy. The president is NOT elected by 'only those people whom Panader deems qualified'. It is by the people. That means generally ALL the people. Now if a consensus of ALL the people is as such that they were uninformed and foolish in their choice, then that's the President they deserve anyway. That's democracy, that's the way it should be and that's what you have to deal with whether you like it or not.

[Sheets of Easter]

66. Hey, I have an idea! Poll taxes!!!!

Oh...

[Thothmes]

67. Use to call them literacy tests in the South and they are

Unconstitutional. Literacy/understanding/common sense, are not required to vote.

[LanternWaste]

69. lest we all fall and fail, disenfranchised forever...

An elderly friend of mine is (well... was) a constitutional lawyer. He imposed a verbal litmus test on all friends and acquaintances to separate the chaff from the wheat so to speak. Anyone who failed his test was then considered ignorant (or, as you so deftly put it, didn't know "their ass from a hole in the ground").

The question was "which Article of the U.S. Constitution validates the existence of national debt?" Now, as he asked this to us in person, and prior to the existence of Wiki, cheating was obviously precluded.

Now, it seems to me a most basic, straight-forward question about our Constitution to me-- not esoteric at all, nor bogged down in arguable minutiae.


Thus, the *rhetorical* question begs to be asked (rhetorical as we are now in the age of Wiki, and are not face to face...)

"Does one know the answer to his question posed, or is one ignorant of the basics of the constitution and should thus be disenfranchised from voting?"


*********************************************************************************************

Or (and this is where I fall)... maybe one may feel the question is indeed too esoteric. But who's to objectively and factually state as an absolute whether it is, or is not too esoteric?


For the record-- I was placed into the Ignorant category by him. Good thing he wouldn't support your initial thesis lest we all fall and fail, disenfranchised forever from a most fundamental and basic right, merely because someone didn't think we were smart enough to vote in their country...

[mdmc]

72. voting doesn't mean anything

driving means something

[bean fidhleir]

74. We *should* have a qualification for voting. It could be as simple as

requiring that people appear at a political discussion group for a certain number of sessions before each election. No requirement that they actually participate - they could kip in a corner - just that they physically be there. Anyone so poor and beset that it would be a serious hardship to make public sessions could get ad-hoc accommodation, door/door transportation, and even childcare to make it work for them.

[dysfunctional press]

76. rehnquist would have LOVED you...

he felt the EXACT same way.