Voting is a priviledge, not a right... And there should be restrictions and penalties attached, IMH

People, please stay on task here. Stop arguing with each other in the middle of someone's thread! It totally ruins the pace of the thread. That said,

Yes, I agree with the OP in some of the aspects. Very interesting thread with a very interesting take on the subject.

I agree with your basic premis, make sure that the voters understand the issues and the voting process.

But how do you carry this out? What company do you hire to measure the voters? Does that company have lobbyist? Political Agenda? Kinda like Acorn, for example?

I guess what I'm really asking is how would you protect such a test from fraud and corruption?

Originally posted by SolarE-Souljah
People, please stay on task here. Stop arguing with each other in the middle of someone's thread! It totally ruins the pace of the thread. That said,

Yes, I agree with the OP in some of the aspects. Very interesting thread with a very interesting take on the subject.

Your right. My apologies OP, I can be a vague prick sometimes. Lets get back on topic.

There are too many technicalities in excluding people like this.

What if someone couldn't obtain a good education but liked what the candidate had to say and believed in his stance on issues? Maybe this person is a hard working farmer that pays taxes but is not entirely interested in politics enough to know the system beyond the issues.

Should he be excluded because he does not understand the system entirely?

Maybe someone is lazy or stupid but changes.. Are they now worthy?

reply to post by Digital_Reality


It's not that complex: Executive- Responsible for the day to day operations of the government. Legislative- Responsible for the drafting and passing of laws. Judicial- Responsible for the enforcement of laws, and in the case of the Supreme Court, the interpretation of the Constitution. Now are you telling me that a farmer can't grasp that simple a concept? I'm not talking about a complex and lengthy test, just the bare basics. But you would be surprised how many natural born citizens could not tell you the three branches and what they do...

As to the poster who stated that the administration of such a test would be problematic, there seems to be no problem in administering drivers license tests, and no outside company seems to be needed there. Seems it would be a simple task to just have those responsible for the issuing of ID's and Driver's Licenses to handle the testing and issuing of Voter's Registration Cards...

I find it completely ironic that we demand that immigrants take a long and complex test on American History and American Civics, but our own citizenry is as dumb as a stump on the same information. I would be willing to bet that if the same test given to new citizens were given to the rest of the American people, the failure rate would be over 75%... Maybe we should start giving that test to voters instead...

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


I agree with your basic premise, but I would actually go further.

I would allow ballots only in English. For that matter, I would allow for all government issued documents and liscence's to be provided only in English. I've always wondered how someone who needs to take a drivers test in Tagalog can read road signs.

People who don't pay taxes should not be able to vote unless they are on a legitimate disability or retired. Our current system has folks incented to vote for greater handouts and is one of the greatest threats to our society. You don't contribute to society in the form of paying taxes, you don't get an opportunity to vote. I would make some allowance for folks in school and perhaps some system of community service that would satisfy the work requirement, but thats it.

Felons should not be able to vote. A felon is by definition who took actions to harm the society and should be forever denied the ability to vote.

We now have 60% of this society who takes more from the government than they put in and the trend is rising. The trend is not sustainable. The income tax is also not sustainable for the same reason. Eliminate the income tax and replace it with a sales tax and everyone can vote. By that notion, all folks should be able to vote for local elections (not federal)because they pay sales taxes.

Originally posted by AllexxisF1
Let's get down to what you really mean.

Blacks, Spanish, Asian, Gays, poor people and Democrats should not have the right to vote.

But white Republicans do.

Some American you are.

Remind to ***** slap you if I ever see you pick up a copy of the Constitution.

Wow, I didn't get that at all and I disagree with the OP about 99% of the time on a myriad of topics. Are the groups you mentioned in your reply too stupid, in your opinion, to pass such a test? Give it a rest, he's simply stating the obvious.....you should have a base idea of what the governments branches and their functions are.....I'd actually like the test to ba a little more in depth.

We can solve the voter fraud real easily -
have a database of everyone with a social security number
you go to the polls and you cast your vote... it's registered
the next time the server updates and you can verify your
vote by claiming it accurate. the precincts draw at random
a sample say 3% to verify accuracy. because a secret
ballot elects the people that are secret... and we only
elect for PUBLIC office ... so the vote should be PUBLIC>

reply to post by Digital_Reality


It is compulsory Australia we get fined if we don't vote'

"Initially the Australian Electoral Commission will write to all apparent non-voters requesting that they either provide a reason for their failure to vote or pay a $20 penalty.

If, within 21 days, the apparent non-voter fails to reply, cannot provide a valid and sufficient reason or declines to pay the penalty, then prosecution proceedings may be instigated. If the matter is dealt with in court and the person is found guilty, he or she may be fined up to $50 plus court costs."

So lazy people end up having to pay and even lazier people pay some more T_T

Compulsory voting always bothered me though

reply to post by somthing


yup agreed.

that's how it works

But if u pay for taxes i think u should be entitled to vote.
and u can always choose not to vote.

I don't know much about this subject but telling certain people u aren't aloud to vote seems wrong.

It like telling them we don't care what u want now go sit over in that corner and let us decide whats right for you.

It doesn't matter who you vote for. They're all the same.

Sorry Jackson, I can't be for this. I think that people should have the right to vote. If you start putting limitations on it, soon it will be back to just white landowners being able to vote.

I don't think that any sort of Jim Crow laws should be enacted. It's just not what America is supposed to be about.

reply to post by whatukno


Well Wukky, then we will have to agree to disagree, because what you get when you allow any and every idiot to vote is what we've got today... And that's NOTHING to be proud of. As I stated in the OP, voting isn't a right, it's a priviledge, and there are many who do not deserve the priviledge... Just take a look around at some of the ignorance thrown around in regards to the issues...

This is pretty silly. I'm sorry OP, but it is. You want to restrict voting to only those who know the issues, essentially. You want to keep the bimbo blondes who watch American Idol out of your government. You want to keep the generally uninformed voter out of your government.

You do realize that only 56.8% of eligible voters voted in 2008? I would go so far as to say that all of those that bothered to vote were informed enough to want to make a decision, the remaining 43.2% either didn't know or didn't care to know.

I think you should start directing your energy on informing the general public on the importance of their opinion and their 'privelage' to vote rather than restricting their ability to decide who governs.

Why one do such a pointless thing as to vote anyway?

reply to post by links234


Get back to me once you have actually read the OP. If you had, you would not have posted that garbage...

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


Yes I guess we will have to disagree then. I don't like the idea of limiting something as fundamental to our republic as the vote. Sure morons may vote for some giant douche bag, just get the word out there and wave something shiny to attract them to your candidate.

The O.P. is right. Voting is not a right, it is a privilege. Too much emphasis is placed upon voting as if this is some lynch pin of freedom. Voting is not the lynch pin of freedom, rights are that lynch pin. Rights come before government, privileges come after. The people at all times hold the inherent political power as they preexist government. People did not create government so that government could turn around and give them rights. They created government to ensure their rights were better protected. When people get to the point that they believe that voting trumps rights, that's the end of freedom.

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


Hello Jaxon,

I would like to suggest that people with ..........

Bad manners !

No decorum !

and

Lack of style !

Be ineligible from voting.....What say you?

Wow...I certainly didn't think my opinion on your idea was 'garbage', I see now why you want this implemented.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
You have no Constitutional Right to vote. The United States Constitution leaves this matter completely up to the States. Each State then decides how Electors are determined for that State, and how State-wide elections will be held. The Constitution does state (via Amendments) that certain persons cannot be kept from voting based only on race, age or sex, but beyond that... In the Supreme Court Case of Bush v. Gore in 2000, the Supreme Court stated in it's opinion:

The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States... (Emphasis mine.)

Your emphasis completely left out the relevant part of 'for electors'. Under the current system for every state (except for two) there's a 'winner take all' system where these electors (selected by the state legislatures that you vote for) will vote for the president based on the majority of voters in that state. I have issues with this myself, but I attack the system, not the voter.

Now given this, I think that there should be both restrictions and penalties attached to voting, and these should be implemented nationwide.

Here's where I thought your argument became silly, going against what is written in the constitution, not having an idea that's not specifically written in the constitution(healthcare debate anyone?). But something that goes directly against what is written regarding states rights in regards to elections.

Restrictions: I think that anyone who shows up to cast their ballot in a National Election (States should still be free to do as they please in State and Local elections) should have to take and pass a simple test. Just one question....Give it in written form, give it orally, give it in braille, give it in American Sign Language...But JUST GIVE IT!

More sillyness, sorry, but seriously? You're saying the individual voter is too stupid to make a decision. Just like black people were 3/5's of a person or couldn't read, thus, shouldn't be allowed to vote because illiterate, or in this case uninformed, people are too stupid to have an opinion.

See, back when I was a kid...

The old 'back when I was a kid' defense. Things were so much simpler then, weren't they? All you had to worry about was homework and chores. Now you're an adult and you have to worry about bills, taxes, jobs, war, famine, family...the whole world changed the day you turned 18, eh?

Today, most of the idiots showing up at the polls think that the position of POTUS is just short of Godhood...

George Bush, Karl Rove and Dick Cheney with all of those signing statements sure did. Poor Barack is playing by the rules.

Penalties: I think that anyone too lazy, or too stupid (refer to above test) to vote should have to pay more taxes than those citizens who actually take the time to become part of the process.

Taxation without representation, wasn't there, like, a huge rebellion over that?

There should be a tax break given to citizens who do their duty and engage in the voting process. The others will just have to pay more. This would have the effect of not only causing citizens to educate themselves on the Governmental processes, but it would also encourage them to get off their lazy butts and vote, thus giving results that truly represent the will of the American People.

Sounds like the school system is broke, once again, you're attacking the voter and not the system.

I can already hear the cynics, "But Jax, our vote doesn't count! It's all fixed!"...If you give up the 'right' to vote, you give up the right to complain about the system!

Nearly half the population didn't vote in 2008, is it treason that they feel what happens in Washington has little to do with their daily lives?
I will agree that if you don't vote, you don't have a right to complain. Everytime I see the line 'Majority of Americans against blah blah blah', I ask myself, "Where was this 'majority' last election season?

If we all voted, we could finally get rid of the two party system...It's time to break the chains!

If no one has ever heard of you they will not vote for you. The parties with the money will get the power. Educate the voter and attack the system, don't attack the voter for participating in the system.

Or you could just do what I do and tell every state governor to go to the Nebraska/Maine system of distribution of electoral votes

Note: I had to parse your words to fit the limit, sorry.