Posted on 08/11/2008 11:34:08 AM PDT by Islander7
I have never been an advocate of the popular notion that "everyone should vote." Some people look at me as if I am somehow un-American when I say that I am not in favor of encouraging people to vote who would otherwise never darken the door of a polling place. I really don't want someone on the streets of Hollywood, who just failed to identify the vice president of the United States on one of Jay Leno's "Jay-Walking" segments, helping to select the person who will lead my government for the next four years.
So here is a basic, common-sense test that every American wishing to exercise the right to vote should answer (I'm sure in this dumbed-down era in which we live we will have to come up with multiple choice answers to make it easier, but here are some preliminary questions):
1. Name the three branches of the federal government.
2. Name the current president and vice president of the United States.
3. How long have they served?
4. How long are the president and vice president allowed to serve?
5. How many members are there in the U.S. House of Representatives?
6. How are House Members chosen?
(Excerpt) Read more at gopusa.com ...
Valid, tamper proof ID is OK, but I don’t want to give anyone the ability to apply a litmus test of any kind on the ability to vote.
Alas, the bigoted abuses of the Old South made this good idea impossible now.
Not having a minimum voting test is, IMHO, a punishment from G-d for the sin of slavery and institutionalized bigotry.
How about a basic ENGLISH language test?
You should earn the right to vote by paying taxes, not by living off them.
The thought of all these young MTV fed idiots drooling over Obama gives me the shakes. Idiot slackers choosing our next leader on the basis of nothing but his skin color basically.
These kinds of suggestions are are just silly. Who gets to decide the test questions?
“Consent of the governed” doesn’t change because they’re stupid....
I 100% agree with you! I think the only way you should be able to vote is by going to the local Voter’s board like I did when I registered to vote should be the ONLY way to still do that!
Of course you know there were slave holders up north. There were lots of northern mill owners who made money off of slave labor too and there were THOUSANDS of black slave owners. Those sins, as you call them, can be spread all over the north and over all races.
Voters Should Pass A Minimal Civics Test and I.Q test.
The author had better be careful using an expression like “darken the door.” He will be accused of being a bigot and hounded mercilessly.
Naw... if that’s the case, I don’t think you should be a citizen unless you SERVE in the military for at least four, full years and you can’t run for office unless you’ve served at least 8 years.
I have said many times that a person should show a recent check stub to be able to vote. I am tired of welfare recipients voting more benefits for themselves by voting in those politicians who pander to those on welfare. I know that some people who work are on welfare, so I’m not bashing them here.
I think whoever pays the rent/mortgage should get to cast the vote. If the slacker kid is working, and paying taxes, then he/she can cast their own vote. If mommy and daddy are still paying the bills for Jr/Princess, then they get to cast the votes for their children also.
Some, sure.
But most northern states were not slave states (for economic reasons more than cultural superiority, I think), and we got the stupid rule that we can’t have basic civics requirements for voting because of the the “Literacy Tests” (replete with secret, unappealable, board that determined if you passed) used to keep blacks from being able to vote.
That particular sin was unique to the Jim Crow south, and caused us the problem.
As an aside, saw Condi Rice talk about why she was a Republican. Her dad walked into a Democratic location and asked to register. The guy behind the counter held up a jar of beans and told her dad he could register if he could tell him how many beans there were in the jar.
He left, went to the Republican location, and they signed him right up.
Still baffles me how blacks got hoodwinked by the bigots that run the Dim party. They created laws and a welfare state in an cynical effort (a successful effort, too, I might say) to keep them down and tied to the Dim party.
Makes me ill.
I agree that voters should be required to register, in person. When registering, the voter should be required to prove citizenship, by showing a birth certificate or a naturalization certificate. In 1998, I lived in Calif., and I volunteered for Bob Dornan’s campaign. When I did phonebanking, about 10 of the people, I called, said that they weren’t U.S. citizens. They were Mexican, Vietnamese, or Korean. They were probably able to register, to vote, because of the motor voter law. When anyone is at a DMV, he or she can get a voter registration form, take it home, and mail it to the county government, without proving that he or she is a U.S. citizen.
How about stake holders only vote, own a house, you get to vote. That stops the handout crowd in it’s tracks.
Much as I hate to say it voting is an absolute right. Being ill informed or just plain stupid does not void that right. Proving you are who you say you are and a US citizen however should be a requirement.
That would punish people for their age and for where they live- a young lawyer living in NYC, renting and paying tens of thousands of dollars in taxes is more of a stakeholder than the home-owning retiree drawing tens of thousands in government benefits.
At least for propositions.
If you can’t read and understand the entire thing, every word, you shouldn’t be allowed to vote on it.
No...they just need a basic math test. When people see what Liberals want to do with their paychecks, they will know enough to vote and to vote responsibly!
Really? Odd that it was missed during the construction of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and The Declaration of Independence.
Voting is a privilege, and has at various times been limited to property owners, men and the educated.
Even now, it is restricted by age and felony status. That's hardly the mark of an "absolute right".
Bingo!
Question to would-be white voter: How many members in the Us House of Representative?
Question to would-be black voter: Name them.
Except that landowners with this right never would have sold land to new people to own their own homes. They would figure out systems of rent/lease and we would all be feudal serfs to the landowner.
Basics? Here’s the basics ...
I know that some of you don’t like to read long drawn out missives...
so here’s the executive summary.........
*John McCain
Congress - 26 years
Military Service - 22 years
*Barack Obama
Congress - 143 days
Military Service - 0
Summary Concluded.
have never been an advocate of the popular notion that “everyone should vote.”
You and me both brother..
The founders understood that the vote was the most important thing they were giving the citizens. During that time the citizens understood that also.
Unfortunately nowadays far to many citizens see voting as a means of getting something from someone else, forcing others to do what a few think is best themselves, and on and on.
Dead people vote in our elections, non citizens vote, illegal aliens vote and on and on. Surely this is NOT what our founders intended.
We already do and always have kept certain people from voting. Mental patienst, children, etc.
You are correct, voting is not an absolute right. There are restrictions, primarily age and residency. There are other restrictions, for instance, in some states convicted felons may not vote. None of these restrictions are considered unconstitutional.
The commenter is correct in the sense that if you meet a state’s reguirements then you have the right to vote.
Age requirement goes without saying and one forfeits his right when he commits a felony. The “privilege” as you refer to it is a right of citizenship unless of course you want to go back to the days when non land owners, blacks and women were denied the “privilege”.
“What has god to do with the way the voting laws are set up?”
Well, it started with this:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
Just use my 5th grade grandson's civics test. He is 10 years old, and in his school, the 5th graders must know their senators and congress critter's names, the President and Vice President, and get this one... all nine supremes...
Hey, 90% of US voters couldn't pass this test.
My grandson was very impressed that I could name all the supremes...starting with Diana Ross.
See if you can sell it to democrats.
Won’t be many voters left. Most people couldn’t pass a simple driving test if their lives depended on it.
I’ve long said that any right also entails the responsibility to educate yourself to exercise the right responsibly. I would say that any prospective voter be required to name all the major party candidates for at least one race on the ballot that year. If they can’t, they’re turned away as insufficiently prepared to vote responsibly. They can bone up and come back later in the day if they want to. This wouldn’t be partisan in any way, but would require the voter to show an absolute minimum amount of knowledge about the election before being allowed to vote.
As I remember when I became a citizen in 1964, Texas had a
“Poll Tax”. Wasn’t much, maybe $5 but you had to pay to
get a voter registration card. Needless to say it eliminated
quite a few freeloaders.
That and two years of Federal service
That's just it. It's not a "right of citizenship" or it could never have been denied to those groups in the first place. At least our Constitution doesn't recognize the vote as a "right of citizenship" in its current form.
You can certainly argue that the vote should be a right of citizenship, but it's simply not the case today.
Are those below voting age "governed"? How about convicted felons? Yet neither of those groups may vote.
That statement clearly doesn't mean that each and every individual in the group called "the governed" must give their consent.
And the fact that there are requirements proves that the right is not absolute.
So, the question becomes this: What should those requirements be?
I think it's not too much to ask that the prospective voter show some minimal understanding of the issues upon which he wishes to vote.
If we understand that it's dangerous to life and limb for someone to drive with know knowledge of driving laws or the operation of a vehicle, and require testing and licensing for drivers, then why is it out of the question to do something similar for voting?
I believe basic English literacy, reading comprehension and government tests should be given. Pass a basic voter's test and get a voting license. Anyone who honestly graduates high school civics class should be able to pass it.
“I don’t think you should be a citizen unless you SERVE in the military for at least four, full years “
Thus turning the military into another social experiment beyond what it has already suffered and making a fascist State out of the US whereby it holds the military as central to its identity. No thanks. I value military service having served myself but I see no reason to turn the US into a military identity. We value our civilian lifestyle and our service to country equally but our military is subservient to the civilian control.
Besides, if you think that is the greatest idea, let me trump you and say why stop at such a short sighted goal? Why not make high-schools military academies? In fact, why not simply indoctrinate all children at the age of 3 into military academies and get serious about military service and discipline? It worked for the Soviet Union, didn’t it?
Of course it didn’t and of course I think such ideas are silly, but my point is when you think you have a hard-core idea someone else can push that to the limits. This country is built on rational thinking and not extreme reactions to perceived problems. We don’t have a problem with people not serving and to appreciate this country a person does not need to serve in the armed forces. If that is what you think it will take then turn out the lights and lock the doors, this country is finished.
Still baffles me how blacks got hoodwinked by the bigots that run the Dim party. They created laws and a welfare state in an cynical effort (a successful effort, too, I might say) to keep them down and tied to the Dim party.
Simple, the DamRat party wants to keep them dependent on them so they’ll get the votes. It’s all about job security for the ‘rats.
Democrats would agree with this idea if they make the test questions, ex.:
1. César Chávez organized the United Farm Workers to overcome the oppression suffered by workers who harvest what crop?
2. Global warming is melting the polar ice caps and causing the extinction of which large white animal?
3. What judicial branch of the U.N. has authority over U.S. courts?
4. What 2000-year-old fictional book is illegal in American schools?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.