Winston Churchill said "the greatest argument against democracy is a short conversation with the average voter." Should voters be tested on their knowledge of issues before being allowed to vote and be able to demonstrate a basic knowledge of the facts involved?
I am not proposing it simply gauging reaction by the way, give your reasons.
Normally I would say yes, but if we did that there would be about 6 people voting.
Although I'd love the idea of someone being told "you're too stupid, go home" with how corrupt the political system already is, that would be fairly close to impossible to implement.
Absolutely not. That would be to exclude those who have not had the benefit of education, are their concerns less valid than those who are educated?. And, who decides what is fact? A few years in academia teaches most of us that there are only perspectives and theories, the debates rage amongst the educated, too. To suggest such a thing will take us all back to days of international suffrage. In retrospect, I'm not surprised that the likes of Churchill made such a comment.
I think it's not a good idea. However, I wish some politicians in the Philippines would be required to take a test before they could run for office. Honest.
I have mixed feelings on this question. I sometimes wonder if only those who pay federal income taxes should be allowed to vote in national elections. I suppose, though, that would be "un-democratic."
I think democracy is in crisis anyway. There is a debate taking place in the United Kingdom at the moment that asks if prisoners should be allowed to vote. I personally feel the vote should be universal and the right of all people. But its fair enough to ask is a person suitable to vote. Should their knowledge of democracy be tested before they can vote. Maybe it should. Perhaps the vote should be earned rather than automatically granted when a person reaches voting age.
No, citizens get to vote. Politicians are meant to inspire--and that include inspiration to give damn and take an interest. Something that sometimes gets hard to do with business-as-usual Washington.
Most people are voting in ONE issue alone, whatever is the most important for them. They see the tree, but not the forest.
How do you convince people who are anti-abortion BUT for death penalty that their position makes no sense?
Sometimes they are living in that tree, so naturally it is important to them.
A test sounds logical but voters are not always logical. I believe, most vote with their hearts or emotions.
Voting is a right not a privilege.
I can't believe this is going through without anyone saying anything about voter suppression.
I am conservative and would have gone deaf from the screams by now had I suggested such a thing as this.
Finally and thankfully, here is something that you and I agree on. Voting is a right, no if's and's or but's. Any attempts to deny or limit a citizen's access to vote and/or ability to vote is completely out of line with what we, as a country, supposedly stand for.
Anyone, regardless of political affiliation should be condemned for advocating voter suppression or limiting access to the polls.
Let's not forget the assertion you may possibly not be intelligent enough to have the right to vote.
Now maybe you understand why I am opposed to the agenda these folks wish to impose on us.
It is not as much a question of intelligence as it is a question of ignorance. Plenty of people are voting without having the slightest idea about the issues and their only "knowledge" comes from TV commercials. I am opposed to voting suppression, BUT I am all for educating the electorate.
In a strange way, this is like everyone's right to be a parent, but very few getting educated about how to be a responsible one.
By these folks do you mean the guy who asked a question while explicitly stating he did not support the idea? The agenda I am scared of is the one that attempts to intimidate people into not asking controversial questions, in other words the cause of stagnation and ignorance.
Nope I am talking about the folks who a little over a month ago screamed to high heaven if you had to have an ID to vote but now apparently want to go another direction towards voter suppression by having a "test".
I also notice it's the left wing wanting to do this which indicates to me nothing more than trying to suppress conservative voters.
As I said........a little over a month ago the screams would have been deafening had this been suggested...especially by conservatives. It's just fine now of course.
Wow you really should read what you are replying to I have twice now pointed out that I do not agree with the idea that I was interested in what the public opinion on it is. Get it yet?
Again... most of the liberals on the thread have said this is not a good idea.
I don't care if you ask a controversial question. Just don't be surprised when I give a controversial answer.
I never had a doubt that you posing the question was simply that...I knew from the beginning what your views were. I was, however, surprised and shocked by some of the answers that some people have given.
For example, "Only property owners should vote." "Anyone on assistance should lose their rights" "Voting is a privilege, not a right?" "Only those who pay federal income taxes should have the right to vote", etc. Shameful!
Wow! We know what we are facing, just by these answers, how we will have to fight to expand the vote-not limit or suppress it-but expand it and make sure that everyone who can vote and wants to vote is afforded the opportunity to do so.
As for requiring photo ID- many eligible voters simply have no way to get the documents that would be required. In the case of many older voters, there are no birth records available. So, even though they are citizens, their right to vote should be taken away? B.S.!
As for many poor citizens- they simply do not have the financial means to obtain the documents that would be required. When and if the government (states pushing for a specific type of photo ID) shell out the money for the birth certificate or whatever other paperwork required AND guarantee free voter ID cards, then maybe... Alot of people simply cannot afford the $30.00 often required to obtain a certified birth certificate. Hard to believe? How many of us think $30.00 is nothing? Too many! These doubters have no clue that $30.00 has to pay for a week of food for poorer citizens. Some rely on less than $30.00 for that week.
People like Husted and Rick Scott should be prosecuted and as of late, Scott Walker has doubled down. ANYONE who attempts to keep others from voting should be charged with voter suppression and election tampering.
As for "intelligence" testing? Thought we settled that issue long ago---Anyone who advocates for this idea should seriously question their own ability to PASS an "intelligence" test!
To anyone who seeks to suppress and/or limit voters' rights? Clean your KKK sheets and hoods, renew your John Birch Society memberships and dig out your "I love Joe McCarthy!" pins!
Your emotional response appears sincere and compassionate, but factually - you offer a deficit that often accompanies most irrational emotional responses.
Factually - U.S. voting is a privilege - not a right. I am doubtful you can present factual evidence to the contrary.
On the other hand, I did say it was essentially a matter of semantics - as most U.S. citizens view it as a right - even if our laws don't.
As for voter ID requirements - a little research would have shown you that in almost every case; states proposing them have also provided fee waivers, and/or specific programs to assist voters in their "quest" for an ID. Yes, especially for the "poor" folks on a $30 food budget.
I, as well have others, have written extensively on this subject. There is also a plethora of official .gov sites for voter education, (about the actual laws and requirements), concerning how to obtain their FREE, ( although possibly not in every single possible case), photo voter ID's.
The information is there - should you wish to buttress the validity of your opinion.
Alas, and unfortunately, your closing statement is more than telling - regarding your "balanced" perspective...
"...To anyone who seeks to suppress and/or limit voters' rights? Clean your KKK sheets and hoods, renew your John Birch Society memberships and dig out your "I love Joe McCarthy!" pins!..."
I am against voter suppression - but for voter ID - so according to you I must be a card-carrying Bircher and proud McCarthyite, with a recently cleaned KKK robe in my trunk. You forgot to mention the spare can of gas for the cross-burnings. tsk. tsk.
hmmm... it may sound like a matter of semantics, but no, voting, (in the U.S.), is not a right - it is a privilege. One that is defined, (ie. required qualifications, prohibitions), by multiple state/federal laws, and constitutional amendments.
The most recognized would probably be the Voting Rights Act of 1965, but there were many others.
ALL of which define how the right to vote may not be abridged or denied - but NONE of which actually declare voting a right.
We Americans just take it for granted - when in fact the U.S. Constitution does not declare a right to vote.
Can you take away the rights of "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness[sic]?" Yet the "right to vote is taken away from Felons.
You can suspend/revoke privileges. And our legal system does.
Only landowners should be able to vote! If you are receiving ANY government assistance at all you should have your rights taken from you!
I think that each voter should be given a short questionnaire before entering the polls. It should be multiple choice, somewhere between five and ten questions, each question pertaining to a key issue of debate on which the two major parties disagree. At the end of the questionnaire, the results should be presented to the voter in a way that tells them with which party their beliefs are most consistent. People may be less likely to vote from the heart if they know which party's candidates they tend to agree with.
I think it's a great idea! The questions would reflect the important issues that voters are concerned with and might look like this:
Did Obama ever present a valid birth certificate?
Does Romney belong to a cult religion spawned by satan?
Does Obama hate America and try his best to destroy it?
Does Romney pay income tax?
Is Obama actually a muslim that hates Christianity?
Does Romney hate all poor people and want them to die?
I trust that my point is understood?
Where are you getting your information, Wilderness?
I could swear those were not the same answers in my Voter Education Pamphlet.
And I'm certain MY Voter Education Pamphlet is factual and true.
More factualer and truer than yours!
A right is something given to a person by virtue of them being in a group (e.g. law-abiding adult citizens). Ergo I see not problem at all with calling voting a right.
by Readmikenow 6 weeks ago
I agree with voter ID. It seems that 80 percent of the nations want as well."Amid plenty of partisan rancor over election integrity and voter suppression, a new national poll indicates that most Americans support requiring voter identification to cast a ballot and easier access to early...
by American View 4 years ago
If all the I illegal Aliens said tomorrow they are voting Republican, would the Dems desire Voter ID cards, would they want the voter rolls updated, would they have backed Obama's amnesty for the young illegals?
by Mike Russo 4 years ago
Should Trump have ordered major investigation into voter fraud of him not winning the popular vote?This is what Trump did with the Birther Movement. He made allegations of Obama not being born in this country and no record of his going to college. He never proved it one way or the...
by Readmikenow 10 months ago
If you want to know what Democrats are guilty of...simply see what they are accusing others of doing. THAT is what they're guilty of doing."Will Democrats accept election loss? New report says no.But there is another, equally pressing question: Will Democrats accept the results of the...
by Holle Abee 9 years ago
I just read an opinion piece in the NY Times about requiring a govenrment-issued photo ID to vote. The author, a GA congressman, believes this practice discriminates against African Americans. I don't get it. Anyone can get a photo ID easily - it doesn't have to be a driver's license. One of my...
by ga anderson 7 years ago
Listening to a couple political pundits discussing a local election result - I heard them agree that the low voter turnout for the election probably helped unseat an incumbent.Their logic was that the voters that did bother to vote were probably more-informed voters than would be the case when...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This 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.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We 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 Pixels||We 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.|