Posted on 06/29/2013 6:30:34 PM PDT by Wellington VII
This week’s Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder overturned Section 4(b) of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which mandated federal oversight of changes in voting procedure in jurisdictions that have a history of using a “test or device” to impede enfranchisement. Here is one example of such a test, used in Louisiana in 1964.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
The OldPossum took the Alabama literacy test in 1964. It was not anything like this. Basically, it involved reading short passages, mostly from the Constitution, and answering simple questions based upon what had been read.
If you could not pass this test you were too dumb to go into a voting booth.
I think it was a good thing and I think it ought to be brought back.
Easy test, but tedious and irrelevant to what passing allows you to do.
Much better would be a test covering the Constitution, Bill of Rights, American history, state versions thereof, and current events.
...but Leftists would object, deeming it “impossible”.
What does this mean? It doesn't make sense without quotes around the word "right".
I think the racist morons who concocted this test were barely literate themselves.
back when democrats ruled every statewide office...
Did you read the test? ONE wrong and you fail. I am intelligent but I know it is easy to get 1 wrong in a test like that.
Yup. You didn’t draw a line around that number, you drew a circle.
You didn’t draw a cross above that letter, you drew an x.
Its actually a pretty good basic test if it’s fairly graded.
Democrats we gain democrats
I failed. No soup for me!
What was the right answer?
You are right. I would be able to vote taking this test because I would pass pretty easily. However, I would fail miserably the test from 1800’s that is passed around here from time to time.
I don’t think testing is necessary, but I sure would love for everyone to take a philosophy or critical thinking class before voting.
Compared to some of the responses in this thread you are being accurate in your assessment.
Yeah, I get your point.
There are actually two important questions raised here:
1) is THIS test fair?
2) Is the concept of literacy testing of voters a good idea?
As to 1): if EVERY voter (black, white, rich, poor, etc.) has to take the test under the same conditions, then a particular crummy test will quickly be rejected. And if NOT every voter has to take it, then absolutely, on its face the test is unfair.
As for 2). I offer as a constructive proof the mess we’re in now, with low information voters electing totally unsuitable governance at every level.
But to be honest, given a choice between a “literacy test” or a “skin-in-the-game test” (the simplest of which would be a poll tax), I’d vote for the latter in a heartbeat. Non producers simply SHOULD NOT be able to vote themselves largesse.
As I said to another poster, fair enough.
In many case, absolutely. Affirmative action, for example, is a cancer.
And if any state was doing this today, it would still be wrong. But there are no states doing this so I don’t understand what the concern is. Maybe someone could clue me in...
Granted, but that has nothing to do with the test, per se. SCOTUS will probably disagree with me, but I'd have no problem with the use of a test of this difficulty, so long as the answers were written down and make it like one of those tests in school where you black in the circle and grade it by machine. The leftards will still say that's discriminatory. I don't know or care whether it is or not, but the fact remains that someone not sufficiently literate and intelligent to complete that test (graded without bias) has NO business voting on anything that affects me or anyone else able to complete the test.
Literate or not, most people are uninformed or misinformed. Check out the Zimmerman trial threads for examples, trivial perhaps, but telling.
>> Sorry, i misquoted the test.
OH! NOW it comes out! You LIED!
Okay, I’m tearing up my reasonable reply and working on a snarkier one. :-)
Yes, it’s easy, but........
I’m willing to bet that a third of today’s voters would not be able to pass this within the maximum of 10 minutes.
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.