ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Newly Proposed: Intelligence Test Required for Voters

Updated on July 26, 2012

American Voters Required to Pass Basic Intelligence Test

Reporting for the Daily Constitutional: Investigative journalist - GA Anderson

Republican Motor Voter Tactic Prompt Calls for Voter Intelligence Test Requirement

Prompted by allegations that Republican Party organizers in Illinois bused in 312 mentally disabled patients from the state-run Pilgrim Psychiatric Center, to vote in the hotly contested District 12 House of Representatives race - voting precincts throughout the district are reporting ad hoc Citizen's for Intelligent Voters committees are barring precinct entrances to anyone unable to answer a simple 5-question true or false intelligence test.

Local Republican Party spokesman J. Voltaire issued this statement -strongly dening the allegations of voter fraud.

"Every person we brought to these precincts was a legitimately registered voter. We used the same process that the now-defunct ACORN voter registrars used in their 2008 Presidential race voter drives. Yes, some of those voters may have been sightly confused about where they were, but they were all legally registered District 12 voters."

Local Democrat Party officials, caught in the conflict between allowing these legally registered voters in, or denouncing their mental capacity to form rational voting decisions, are concerned that any response they make could be construed as a call for voter intelligence test requirements. Party spokesmen are deferring any official comments, saying only;

"We feel this very serious and important issue would be better served if all parties concerned refrained from making statements or commenting about any need for voter qualification tests, whether they be intelligence tests or citizenship verification, until election officials have completed their investigation."

*Author's note: The above is entirely fictional, the contents below are not.

Stupid is not a nice word...

Stupid, to me is a very derogatory word. I don't like it, I don't like to use it. And I think it is a very rude word, that will many times reflect as poorly on the person using it, as the person it is directed at, (am I shooting myself in the foot here), but still, it is unfortunately a very apt description for some folks in this world. And those folks are the ones we are about to discuss.

The future of America?
The future of America? | Source

Should there be voter intelligence requirements

Generally speaking, the audacity to even ask that question will prompt such indignation that, 1) it is not deemed to even deserve an answer, and 2) the questioner will receive such looks of derision that a common pond toad would seem a prince in comparison.

But, is it such a blasphemous question?

Put aside for a moment issues of ideology and fairness, hold back on claims of rights and entitlements, for just this once, look at the question in the perspective of the real world we all live in daily. Not the world as we want it to be, but the actual real common-sense world of how it is.

Now, can you honestly say you have never met anyone too stupid to be allowed to vote? Remember the question isn't whether they have a right to vote, just are they too stupid to vote.

Perhaps my world is the fantasy world, but I would view with skepticism any answer that is other than, "Yes, I have." Unless of course you have lived a very cloistered life, and never met more than 11 people.

There are of course, degrees of stupid. From too stupid to come in out of the rain, to semi-stupid, like too stupid to realize you should not strike a match while standing in a puddle of gasoline. Or lick a metal light pole in arctic weather, or stick a bottle rocket in their butt and light it. (one of the Jackass Movie skits was a guy really doing that, not fake, not CG, he really did it)

Now really, should someone in those categories have the power to decide the fate of our elected leaders? Remember this is not about folks that have mental disabilities, or reduced mental capacities, this is about stupid people that do stupid things,

If you answered yes, then you probably wouldn't mind if the moron from the Dipsy-Doodle did your open-heart surgery.


Enough silliness, but the real issue is...

For Americans, the right to vote is one of the foundation stones this great nation stands on. The right of every legal age citizen to participate in choosing our governing leaders. One of the great equalizers, poor man or rich man, each vote counts the same. Guaranteed to us by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution.

Wait... it may be technical and picky, but the Constitution doesn't actually state, and guarantee us a right to vote, like it does with the right to free speech, and freedom of the press, and so on. What it actually does state are the things that cannot be used to deny our right to vote, like race or gender.

Although most states would probably face rebellion if they tried to use it, the Constitution actually leaves the power of establishing which citizens have a right, to vote up to them. For instance, Texas has voter laws that deny the vote to convicted felons and mentally incapacitated people. Many other states have the same. Technically, except for the office of President, which the Constitution does state a minimum age of 18 is required, there is nothing in the Constitution to prevent a state from allowing 13-year-olds to vote in state elections. Not feasible, but technically permissible.

Just making the point that although it would make for a helluva court case, the Constitution would not bar a state from passing a Stupid-voter law. But enough of that, getting back to stupid people voting.

What about people that aren't really stupid...

... but make stupid choices

Like voting for someone because they have the same zodiac sign, or wear the kind of clothes they like, or have a nice smile, or any one of thousands of other reasons that don't have anything to do with a person's ability to do the job.

Of course they have a right to vote for those reasons, but isn't that a stupid way to pick the people to run your government?

Not seeing any legitimate arguments against stupid voting yet?

Before preceding, remember there have been local elections won by as little as one vote. There have been state elections won by as little as seven votes. And there have been national elections where the electoral college votes of a state were determined by fewer than 100 votes.

Yes, one vote can make a difference.

Moving on, what about the stupidly naive, the ones that believe every thing a politician tells them, even when the cold hard proof of the lie is in front of them. Like Congressman Jefferson and his tin-foil wrapped bundle of freezer cash. But he said he didn't do it, it wasn't his, so of course it must be your lying eyes.

Or the stupidly gullible, like the ones that take the list of who to vote for that their buddy Slick gave them, into the voting booth.

Or the really stupidly dumb, that thinks its a gag and just go in an pull all the levers with their eyes closed.

Of course they have the right to do that. Of course they have the right to vote any way they want, and for any reason. Waste it, or give it away, as long as they don't get caught selling it, they have a right to their vote.

But you know that the actions of your elected officials have an impact on your life, on your freedoms and liberties, on your wallet, on the rules that control your efforts and actions, on the taxes taken from your paycheck, your, your, your, your,...

Come on, you know they have a right to vote, but deep inside do you really want that stupid voter to be the swing vote that determines whether Honest Bob or Slick Dick gets control of the rule book you have to live by?

But who has the right to make that decision....

So the righteous indignation is back, "Who has the right to make a decision like that about someone's right?" you ask. Did you ask that? You did? Well at least you are considering that there just might be people out there too stupid to vote.

If a voter can't at least tell me one or two things that their candidate stands for, and maybe a little something about their voting record, or even something as simple as whether or not they have ever been investigated for corruption... then I don't want that stupid voter having a choice concerning the elected officials that will impact my life. I will volunteer to be on the Committee to Weed out Stupid Voters. Hell, another couple drinks and I might even agree to chair the Stupid Committee.

See more GA Anderson Political articles

GA Anderson aka the Curmudgeon
GA Anderson aka the Curmudgeon | Source

About the Author

Writing for the Daily Constitutional, and commentary from the Curmudgeon's desk - GA Anderson

"Seeing it does not make it real, and reading it does not make it true. Use a little common-sense and trust your instincts." - GAA

*Composite image component source citations: Creative Commons images,,, *photo and image source credits: divider and separation images -

Newly Proposed: Intelligence Test Required for Voters Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      terrence peabody 

      6 years ago

      Why not have both elected officials and voters pass an exam?

      Have the House be open to allow anyone to run or vote.

      Have the Senate be a closed community, where to hold office, one must pass a test, and to vote for Senators, one must pass a test. Keep the Presidential elections wide-open like the Senate.

      Hopefully, the Senate will then be the bastion of long-term thinkers; this is in-line with their 6 year terms.

    • Credence2 profile image


      6 years ago from Florida (Space Coast)

      Hi, GA

      "Am I still digging myself a hole?"

      What hole? Thanks, Cred2

    • GA Anderson profile imageAUTHOR

      GA Anderson 

      6 years ago from USA

      @credence2 - Good point, but I think either I conveyed the wrong intent or you misconstrued my meaning.

      I don't think I necessarily meant earn as in an exchange, - worthy would probably have been a better word choice.

      as in - why give a finely crafted, lovingly made, and expensive toy to a child that is known to tear up every toy given to him - give him a stick instead

      Later when the child matures and has demonstrated that he understands the value of things - then give him the finely crafted toy

      Am I still digging myself a hole?


    • Credence2 profile image


      6 years ago from Florida (Space Coast)

      Hi, GA, I couldn't help but notice this statement you made

      "I really do believe some people just don't deserve to have the power of their vote just because they are a citizen - seems like you ought to have to do something to earn that power"

      This is huge, it is a fundemental difference between ideological poles. I don't know, it seems to me that the franchise comes with citizenship. No taxation without representation, right? We all pay taxes in one form or another. For a lefty like me, people being left out of the process of determining who levies the taxes etc, is anathema. The idea of having to earn the privilege takes us into the direction of who determines what constitutes "earning", disenfranchising many, I don't think that I want to see that.

      We at one time said that only caucasian property owners could vote. Are we not pleased that the early interpretation of who has earned the right has been expanded, even though there are so many that do not appreciate what has been done to make this privilege available to them? From Thurston Howell to the vagrant on the street, the right to vote sacrosanct. In America, it must always be part and parcel of what it means to be a citizen.... Thanks, Cred2

    • GA Anderson profile imageAUTHOR

      GA Anderson 

      6 years ago from USA

      @claptona - Welcome back, glad to have ya.

      Yep, it's too easy for plain ranting to turn away readers, and diminish the credibility of a point.

      Not to mention that I really dislike "Talking points" types of perspectives.

      Glad you enjoyed it.


      ps. thanks for the follow. I will return the favor soon

    • claptona profile image

      John D Wilson 

      6 years ago from Earth

      Hey GA,

      I got it this time - sarcasm!

      Based on some truth's.

      Good read, enjoyed it.


      John D. Wilson

    • GA Anderson profile imageAUTHOR

      GA Anderson 

      6 years ago from USA

      @Credence2 - Glad you enjoyed the read, and appreciate the effort you put into your comments. Makes the effort worthwhile.

      Just in case someone may misinterpret my meaning - I really do believe some people just don't deserve to have the power of their vote just because they are a citizen - seems like you ought to have to do something to earn that power.

      but... I just can't see any safe way, or human authority, (in our current state of development), that I would trust to make those kind of decisions.

      sigh... Darwinism really is a long-term project


    • Credence2 profile image


      6 years ago from Florida (Space Coast)

      Great Article, GA, you can believe that the thought has crossed my mind several times.

      People will say that I am dumb for being willing to live on the "Democratic plantation" instead of embracing the GOP version of a free-market opportunity society.

      But when I have a presidential candidate that is not aware that China is a nuclear power or who dismisses the importance of reading a part of being the Chief Executive, I am certainly ready to cut the electorate some slack!

      I think that it is stupid for so many middle and lower class voters to vote for those that clearly do not have their economic best interests at heart.

      It depends upon your point of view, because of that difference of opinion I see the franchise as available to all

      Citzens of the US, registered in the state, county and municipality where they reside

      Attained the age of Majority which is desribed according to the 26th amendment, babies cannot vote.

      Not be in prison or medically (not politically) certified as mentally impaired. I do not think that it is fair to disenfranchise people after they have spent time in prison, once they have paid their debt to society, I think that it is petty and mean spirited.

      They do not need to know how to read or write. I should write a hub about the appropriateness of the id card as a prerequite to voting, another time though. We have had poll taxes and literacy tests, none are acceptable.

      Just a point of view from the left bank.

      You write very stimulative article, we are going to get along famously... Cred2

    • profile image

      Old Poolman 

      6 years ago

      GA - To some degree, I have to agree with you. The percentage of voters who even bother to vote has been declining for years. I guess for someone to show up even if they only pull the single party handle is something we should be pleased with. So often I hear people say they don't bother to vote because "your vote doesn't count anyhow." That statement makes me see instant red. As far as educating voters on a candidates qualifications other than his or her party affiliation, I have no idea how this would be accomplished. A good friend of mine said he always votes for a Democrat because they give you more stuff. Now how is that for intelligent reasoning on choosing those who will control the country?

    • GA Anderson profile imageAUTHOR

      GA Anderson 

      6 years ago from USA

      @OldPoolman, -Morning, (at least it's morning here.

      Good points. But personally, even though I would like to see a little more "vote for the person" mentality, I don't have a major issue with someone voting party line. (not quite regardless of the candidate, but almost), at least it's a beginning, they are thinking enough to choose an affiliation.

      umm... it was a bit of a struggle to get my fingers to type that, but, some thought is better than none.

      Regarding your ID issue, I have not heard an argument against it yet, that is not purely politics for voter control. And on this issue - without a doubt, it is a Democrat tool.

      Proponents have offered everything they can, including going door to door to provide the necessary service to create and deliver a valid ID. Geesh... where's the problem?

      Oh right, the "I don't want no 'govment ID" database Libertarian/anti-government folks . Well, fine, don't go the national ID route. Keep it local. State drivers license, age-of-majority ID's, whatever. There are plenty of safe ways to handle it locally.

      Except for the national ID idea, which I oppose - Just can't swallow the other arguments against voter ID requirements.

      Thanks for the visit. (and the thought for another article)


    • profile image

      Old Poolman 

      6 years ago

      GA - Interesting and informative hub. Some of the comments I read prove the need for this hub you wrote. It is obvious their mindset is to just pull the "D" or "R" handle and call it good. This will most likely never change until all the single handle bunch can no longer make it to the polls.

      It would be great if this test could be implemented, but many feel voters should not even be required to show ID prior to voting. Having to show ID would eliminate all of the dead people from voting, and limit all of the live people to only one vote. The ID requirement and the intelligence test you describe would drastically change the outcome of future elections.

    • GA Anderson profile imageAUTHOR

      GA Anderson 

      6 years ago from USA

      @lovemychris - ahhh, welcome so glad to see you here. Your comments are always to the point.

      But sometimes that point is a little fuzzy, for instance;

      ... the Democrat doctor you mentioned, was actually a nurse, I know, it's a "whatever" point, but at least we should be clear in our discussions....

      .... skipping a point, to get to another, had you read more intently you would not have mistaken what I said, I said he walked out like he had a broom stuck up his....leg, I did not say I wanted to stick one there.

      We will have a much more enjoyable time if we address what really was said vs. what you think you read.

      Sometimes it seems your desire is more to look for a hook to hang a statement you want to make, on, than to actually address what was written.

      ... and further, even though I didn't call him stupid to his face - yes, if that type of response was all he had, then I do think he was stupid - because he was letting someone else do his thinking for him - oddly, it does appear at times as if that may be a situation you might be familiar with.

      But, still glad you stopped by, I'm sure we will both enjoy some lively exchanges. And who knows, one of these times we might even stumble across a point of agreement.

      Or at least we can hope. Maybe after you have actually read a few more of my articles, (your comment indicates you really haven't), you may discover we might have more positions in common than you thought.


    • GA Anderson profile imageAUTHOR

      GA Anderson 

      6 years ago from USA

      @thebigbagblog - thanks for dropping in. Appreciate your time to comment

      Although I do believe the point of the article - there really are people too stupid to make intelligent decisions about voting - the administration of A TEST, was a thought that sat on my lap the whole time it was being written.

      From my perspective - I can not yet conceive of any government or legal construct that I would trust to make that kind of a decision.

      Unfortunately, the legal competency challenges you mentioned have been shown to, almost as many times as not, be extremely susceptible to manipulation.

      Just like insurgents vs freedom fighters, there are too many instances where one persons crazy loon was another person's wise oracle.

      This problem is one reason I favor our electoral college system for presidential elections.


    • lovemychris profile image

      Leslie McCowen 

      6 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

      Ahahaha Ralph!!

      SO true.

      and Mr Nelson,I see a lot of your hubs have responses from right-wingers like you, who make fun of democrats... and you called a democratic doctor stupid and said you wanted to stick a broom up his...leg!

      Can't really complain about finger-pointing when you do it all the DO think you are right, and democrats are stupid, yes?

      Dish it out....take it!

    • thebigbagblog profile image


      6 years ago from CYBERSPACE

      I wonder if the direction this COULD take, would be similar to "mental competence" as in a court of law. Extending this defiinition to "voters" wouldn't be that far a stretch. Interesting HUB, and welcome aboard!!

    • GA Anderson profile imageAUTHOR

      GA Anderson 

      6 years ago from USA

      Hello Ralph and welcome. Thanks for the visit and comment.

      You know, I took great effort to not point any fingers at any affiliation in this commentary. Just making a pretty basic and common-sense point.

      Guess you just have a point to make also.

      Glad to have your views, drop back by anytime.

      ps. maybe some of my other political articles might also offer you a similar platform for your point.


    • Ralph Deeds profile image

      Ralph Deeds 

      6 years ago from Birmingham, Michigan

      Intelligence tests would eliminate at least half the Tea Party and ninety percent of Fox News viewers.


    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

    Show Details
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)