Posted on 10/02/2012 9:35:34 AM PDT by bkopto
It makes zero sense that my vote – a working, tax-paying, law-abiding citizen who studies candidates and issues on the ballot – is cancelled out every four years by someone who knows little about our nation’s business… and does even less to contribute it.
Giving the right to vote to unintelligent and uninformed people – statistically those most likely to not work, not pay taxes, and contribute nothing of substance to society – is tantamount to giving them a license to steal. And it’s a very, very bad idea.
The idea of government “of the people, by the people, and the people” pre-dates the United States by some 2000 years, dating back to ancient Greece. In the Greek system, with a population of an estimated 250,000, only an estimated 30,000 (about 10%) were “full,” voting citizens: women, children, and slaves were not considered citizens.
And of the 30,000, only about 5,000 (about 2% of the total population) actually exercised their right to attend assembly meetings and voted.
The basic idea was that the people who contributed the most to society, and were the most knowledgeable about its genuine needs, were the ones trusted to make the decisions about how things should be run… and paid for.
Technically, the United States is not a democracy: it’s what is called a “Constitutional Republic.”
That means that the members of each branch of government are elected directly by the people, and the scope of authority for each branch is intentionally limited by the Constitution… to prevent any one branch from amassing too much authority.
Clearly, the Founding Fathers’ greatest fear was a centralized federal government that could overpower the people, either with ballots (hence, the three branches of government) or bullets (hence, the Second Amendment.)
While the Constitution says nothing about “one man, one vote” (that emerged from court cases in the 1900) what most people don’t realize that, when our country was founded, our voting rights started much like the ancient Greeks; as we evolved – and adopted the 14th, 15th, 19th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th amendments – voting rights were broadened. And that’s, by and large, a good thing.
What’s not a good thing is that, by opening up voting to anyone with a pulse, we’ve turned voting into something less than a treasured right entrusted to our most responsible citizens: today, less than half of all eligible voters (40-55%) cast their ballot, and many who do vote do a marginal job educating themselves on the issues.
What has resulted, however, is something that may not be in the United States’ best long-term interest: the “low information voter” as political operatives label them.
These are people who cast their votes for the candidate who’s cooler… funnier… more charismatic… has the neatest website… or takes time from his campaigning to appear on “The View.”
Or, conversely, voters who has been led to dislike a candidate’s opponent by misinformation, spin, or outright lies. The ability to govern, to lead, to act responsibly, to be trusted to protect America’s international and long-term interests… fall by the wayside, because we like someone else’s Twitter feeds more.
If you Google the words “stupid” and “voters” you’ll get treated to a YouTube cornucopia of Idiocy in Democracy.
People who are so stupid, that their opinion shouldn’t matter… especially in setting our national course headings, or choosing our leader.
Their dim-wittedness isn’t a function of sex, age, race, religion, or any of the other classic forms of categorizing people; these people simply defy demographic description due to their denseness.
And we want these morons banding together, and selecting our national leadership?
But there is a solution; I call it “Progressive Vote Values.” It’s a lot like “Progressive Tax Rates” where they more money you earn, the higher tax rates you pay… only in this case, the more you know about the issues facing America, the higher the value your vote.
If I were responsible for setting voting laws, I would immediately put into place the following non-discriminatory laws:
1) When you register to vote, you must take – regardless of party, income, race, religion, etc. – the U.S. Citizenship test (given in English) that all new immigrants do. Before immigrants earn the right to vote, they must pass a 100-question written test, to ensure that they have sufficient knowledge of our nation’s history, constitution, and law-making processes. Some of the questions.
What do we call the first ten amendments to the Constitution? The House of Representatives has how many voting members? If both the President and the Vice President can no longer serve, who becomes President? The Federalist Papers supported the passage of the U.S. Constitution. Name one of the writers. Name one of the two longest rivers in the United States.
Those are very good questions; if a soon-to-be citizen can answer those, he or she can probably be trusted to be informed enough on the issues facing America to vote.
Hence, the value of your vote will be determined your score: if you score 100% — and why wouldn’t you? – your vote counts in full; if you score a 50%, your votes counts for one-half.
Before heads start exploding at the ACLU, NAACP, and SPLC, these are not “literacy tests” given only to one group of voters, as prohibited by the Voting Rights Act of 1965: they would be the standard, uniform tests given to ALL voters… and modeled directly after the test given to modern-day immigrants before they are granted citizenship in the United States.
2) If you don’t pay any sort of taxes – income tax, property tax, capital gains, something other than sales tax – you vote is automatically reduced by 50%. One of the biggest issues in political campaigns is taxes and spending… if you’re not paying taxes, by definition, you’re deciding how everyone else’s money is getting spent. That’s not fair.
3) Ballots and voting instructions are printed in U.S. English only… not the half-dozen languages currently supported by bankrupt counties across California.
4) In order to ensure that each voter is who they claim to be, they will need to present a state-issued photo ID. This enables the vote tabulation system to accurately count each vote as proportionally appropriate for each voter.
Of course, critics of this program will call it racist, sexist, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, and elitist… when, of course, is it none of those things. No one is be singled out on any demographic basic.
It’s like flunking your driver’s test: you have no business being on the road unless you know what you are doing. Same goes with the voting booth.
If your vote only counts for 50% in 2012, you’ll have four years – until 2016 – to 1) study American history, 2) get a job, 3) learn English, or 4) get a photo ID.
In the old days, people used to get a whole college degree in that amount of time. You can probably handle those four things.
Those specific four are pretty good, but will never happen.
Why would those why knows nothing, pays no taxes, has no ID or cant read English vote for someone who will take away their vote?
my husband served as a USAF officer for 13 years and separated from active duty in 2011
you are correct there is a pro-USA mindset in the military however there is also a growing entitlement culture as well
social programs are abundant... craft classes at the family center... subsidized day care.. youth programs and the demand for free tylenol at the clinic... do military members deserve their pay? absolutely they do we spent three years in Japan away from family
I happen to believe military officer’s should contribute to the health care costs of their families.. if they don’t we won’t have enough money left to build the weapons to win wars ( see former sec gates comments on the drag of health care on the DOD budget)
back to the question...I am not for one second implying that the brave men and women should not be able to vote....only suggesting that military members and their families have as much as a pro-government perspective as the welfare recipient...controversial absolutely but sadly true.
let the flaming begin....
and when they make you take that test in Spanish (and I consider that a given) then most of the folks you want to vote won’t be counted.
It is incumbent upon conservatives to get their message out in a clear and concise manner. When we fail to do that the dims are able to rabble rouse.
If government were constrained to its Constitutional levels, it wouldn’t matter nearly as much who voted.
Simple.
If you are a net producer you get to vote, if not then no vote.
Exempt the military but all other government workers and contractors and anyone receiving public assistance gets no vote.
Aww shut up! Quit whining about the people in the wagon and get back to pushing it!
Do you remember the famous picture of the guy in Florida holding a ballot up to the light so that he determine if someone voted or not? Can you imagine a picture of the same guy holding a picture ID up to the light to compare the picture with the lady waiting to vote? We will be seeing that soon.
How did we get by in our elections in our past? Did Americans bring pictures to vote for Lincoln, Coolidge or Eisenhower?
Why not have voters leave a thumbprint and a signature next to their names on the voter rolls? Why not also video record the entrances and exits to polls? Those changes could be made with no fuss, no muss and no lawsuits.
Instead, politicians design rules imposing a mandate that people buy a government ID knowing that such rules will produce nothing but lawsuits. Why does government always make such dumb solutions that never really work?
“And prior to the 17th Amendment, we didn’t directly elect Senators, either.”
Exactly! There was a reason for that. The Founders only flaw was in not making the Constitution even harder to amend.
I have no problem with the test as long as the politicians have to take it too ... are you listening, Biden ?
Not all professors. See Post 44.
Perhaps it should have been impossible to amend. They can take it or they can leave it, but they don't get to change it unless they are strong enough to defeat its champions on the battlefield. If they want change badly enough, let them bleed for it first.
Well, I'm glad that it didn't take an all-out war to create the 1st and 2nd Amendments. It did take a war to change the slavery provisions. We have to take the bad with the good.
Make that two for the Heinlein proposal.
Would you be OK with members of the military who can afford only to rent being disenfranchised?
“This is fantasy land.”
Yep. But that doesn’t cancel the reality of the problem.
In the USA we constantly emphasize the “right” to vote, but no one ever talks about the responsibilities of voting.
Some simple adjustments can be made immediately
- voters must re-register and confirm address every 2 years
- registration closes at least 3 weeks before an election, or enough time to verify voter rolls and data
- Must have Gov’t issued photo ID when voting.
As I recall, active members of the military were exempt since they were serving in the protection and defense the country.
Someone would come up with the idea of selling small (1 inch?) plots of land so the incompetents would “own land”
What? Yes, really, because if people memorized enough of these answers, they could pass a basic American History test and become voters.
I'm not saying the test should be the same exact version each time, where a simple "cheat sheet" would work! Obviously, the test should be sufficiently engineered so that cheat sheets cannot be used, as is the customary countermeasure in any decent educational institution.
The whole point is knowing enough about American history, which involves basic recall and recognition.
I think you're making it more complicated than it needs to be. Everyone knows DMV photos rarely have much more than a passing resemblance to what we actually look like. Believe me, my wife looked a hell of a lot different from her DL photo when she was in the middle of chemotherapy.
What is more important IMO, is that the name on the DL matches the name of the prospective voter, and the address reflects that on the voter rolls. This isn't going to make elections 100% fraud free, but it will make wholesale fraud more difficult. Combine voter ID with regular rolls purges, and we may finally get to the point where my vote actually counts again.
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.