Posted on 12/15/2021 9:12:57 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew
The State of Indiana can no longer afford to have the civically ignorant elect the civically ignorant. It is time for every Indiana resident and candidate for public office to demonstrate a basic knowledge of civics before they run for public office or vote.
Just as every driver is required to have a basic knowledge and competence in driving before they are allowed to drive on public roads, voters should be required to demonstrate a basic knowledge and competence in honoring and supporting the constitutional republic in which they participate.
To this end, the undersigned request legislation to require the administration of a basic examination prior to allowing a vote or an appearance on an Indiana ballot for public office. The examination must focus on knowledge of, and fidelity to, the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Indiana. Moreover, it must focus on the difference between a right and a privilege, the distinctions related to being a United States citizen as opposed to a citizen of the world, and the difference between simple democracy and a constitutional republic. Candidates for public office must answer at least three essay questions using their own words.
This is especially important for red states to require of people moving from other states or places.
Good for you. If you can just get people to read and think seriously about it, you will have done good work.
Interesting but this will end up with discrimination lawsuit ramifications.
Library Journal website:
According to the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES), 21 percent of adults in the United States (about 43 million) fall into the illiterate/functionally illiterate category.Apr 29, 2020
Literacy Inc. website: (outdated, however)
What percentage of high school graduates can’t read?
According to a study conducted in late April 2015 by the US Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the United States can’t read above a fifth grade level, and 19% of high school graduates can’t read.
Now, imagine Dems defining civic integrity. No thanks.
Literacy tests as a prerequisite to exercise the franchise are patently unconstitutional.
Davis v. Schnell, 81 F. Supp. 872 (S.D. Ala. 1949)
Literacy tests for voters? That’ll pass constitutional muster. Not.
32 million cannot read-—
AND there continue to be demands for higher & higher MINIMUM wages.
Thank you. Maybe we should test the law again. How about literacy tests as a prerequisite for holding public office?
just as competency tests are required to own a gun, this, too, is unconstitutional.
Davis v. Schnell, 81 F. Supp. 872 (S.D. Ala. 1949) appears to be brought because the requirement was only aimed toward a particular ethnicity. Is it unconstitutional to require tests before driving? No.
You’re probably right. History will not look kindly upon the proponents of illiteracy and a Republic that honors it.
It would be more than a literacy test. Basic civic responsibility demands basic knowledge and competence in voting, and especially in running for public office.
“Is it unconstitutional to require tests before driving?”
Apples and oranges.
Driving is a privilege. Voting is a right. Just like owning guns.
Would you like to have a literacy test for buying a gun? Like maybe California can have you list how many genders there are before you can buy a gun. Or maybe they’ll have you explain why Marxism is so much better than capitalism.
Yah, sorry. We do not condition rights on government prequalifications.
That’s why they are called “rights”
If voting were an unconditional right, then we allow infants, toddlers, and young children to vote. Voting is a privilege. This is precisely the matter that should be discussed and defined. Good grief. More than half of the citizens do not know the difference between a right and a privilege. You are a prime candidate for a basic civics test.
The Bill of Rights is explicit in stating gun ownership as a right that “shall not be infringed.” Even there the public has agreed to restrictions from one state to another, however arbitrary they may be.
Voting has been well established as a right reserved for citizens. If you don’t like that then then there’s a good chance you are right now on the wrong forum.
There is no question that the privilege of voting is reserved for a specific set of individuals. There are currently qualifications that must be met in order to vote. It is a privilege, not a right. Rights are few and above legislation. Privileges are many and subject to restrictions.
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.