Don't Let Ignorant People Vote!!!

This appeared on the CNN Opinion page today. Some of the excerpts are:

In an effort to win over ignorant voters, political campaigns are no longer targeting the movable middle as much as the easily misled. Instead of intelligent debates about important topics such as health care reform and cash-strapped states, we have an exchange of easy to remember catchphrases such as "Obamacare" and "War on Unions" -- all in the race to pander to people who can't explain what Congress does.
***
In a recent CNN poll, more than a third of the people questioned wanted to see cuts in military spending, which is a good debate to have. The problem is the poll also revealed most Americans think the military takes up 30 percent of the budget when in reality it's 19 percent. If we don't know how much money is being spent, how can we intelligently say it's too much? And what to make of the 20 percent of folks polled who believe public broadcasting represents 10 percent of the budget, when it's more like a 10th of 1 percent?
***
I know close to nothing about the inner workings of my car, and so I come to my mechanic, ignorant -- but not stupid. As this relates to voting, if people don't know much about current government and politics, they too are ignorant, not necessarily stupid. The difference is that naively paying too much for repairs on a car is not nearly as damaging to foreign policy as a bunch of ignorant voters hitting the polls.
***
I'm not suggesting we kick people out of the political process, only that we require them to have an agreed upon understanding of what that process is. If people are too busy to read up on the government, the Department of Homeland Security is not going to escort them out of the country -- or take away away their citizenship. At any point in which ignorant voters are fed up with being on the outside looking in, they can go to the post office, pick up a brochure with all of the questions and answers in it, and study free of charge.

DISCUSSION: Should there be some test in order to vote?

What? Say literacy? We had that and it was rightfully eliminated as a tool to keep certain demographics from voting. What would be the benchmark? Maybe I'm jaded, but my benchmark is so low, I'd be satisfied with an informed voter.

My favorite is the amount that people think foreign aid makes up of the Federal budget.

Asked to estimate how much of the federal budget goes to foreign aid the median estimate is 25 percent. Asked how much they thought would be an "appropriate" percentage the median response is 10 percent.

In fact just 1 percent of the federal budget goes to foreign aid.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pi...nadara/670.php

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/...reign-aid.html

Even intelligent people will do things—including vote—for devious purposes. In my mind, a devious vote is worse than an ignorant vote. Therefore, I’m all for continuing our present system wherein all, entitled UNITED STATES citizens are given the right to vote: good or bad; informed, ignorant or stupid.

In fact just 1 percent of the federal budget goes to foreign aid. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Dollar Diplomacy has always been cheaper than war.

What? Say literacy? We had that and it was rightfully eliminated as a tool to keep certain demographics from voting. What would be the benchmark? Maybe I'm jaded, but my benchmark is so low, I'd be satisfied with an informed voter. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

I think you misread the import of the question. Definitely not literacy...that fight has already been fought.

The import of the question was whether or not a voter should have some minimal knowledge of government before being able to vote.

If we did, of its 80,000 or so members, how many from eccie would you have vote, Charlie?

Even intelligent people will do things—including vote—for devious purposes. In my mind, a devious vote is worse than an ignorant vote. Therefore, I’m all for continuing our present system wherein all, entitled UNITED STATES citizens are given the right to vote: good or bad; informed, ignorant or stupid. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

There, fixed that for ya. [An American citizen could be from any country in North/South/Central America IMHO.]

If we did, of its 80,000 or so members, how many from eccie would you have vote, Charlie? Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Only the libs.

Seriously, if we did, there would first be a BIG fight over what the test covered. [For instance, I can think of certain FACTS on which we on this board disagree.]

There, fixed that for ya. [An American citizen could be from any country in North/South/Central America IMHO.] Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Charles....you pass geography...we'll still let you cast one vote for whomever the hell you want down in Texas...

Your vote is as impactful as mine in John Lewis's Congressional District....

I think you misread the import of the question. Definitely not literacy...that fight has already been fought.

The import of the question was whether or not a voter should have some minimal knowledge of government before being able to vote. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

No, I understood and think the question is legitimate. The question is how and what to set the benchmark on. Literacy did used to be the criteria at least as far as intellectualism, and I use that word loosely, was concerned. I just have no idea where to draw the line so I think it's best to leave it be. But, I think you're right, or at least right enough to ask the question.

This appeared on the CNN Opinion page today. Some of the excerpts are:


DISCUSSION: Should there be some test in order to vote? Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

While the Founding Fathers did have a point in that you really want an informed electorate voting, ultimately I think you get what you deserve; if you have an uninformed, easily swayed by stupid things electorate who can't find it's collective ass with its collective hands, then you get the Congress we have now. And like others have said, how do you decide the qualifications? Someone will use that process to exclude groups they don't like, as we have seen throughout our history.

This appeared on the CNN Opinion page today. Some of the excerpts are:


DISCUSSION: Should there be some test in order to vote? Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Absolutely not! We are failing in our schools to properly educate people on how government works and on basic economics. This is in part to the problem, lack of education. In addition people tend to be lazy and believe everything they hear or see in media without questioning.

But irregardless everyone who is qualified to obtain a voters registration card has the right to vote period.

Edit: No one should be required to have a minimal knowledge of government to have the right to vote. That would be leaving out the voices of those who want to be heard and use their voting power to do so, even if you think they are ignorant, no one has the right to take the vote away from them based on lack of education in the area of government and politics.

Only the libs. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

That's the problem -- that is CNN's definition of "educated" voters.