I have an opinion that isnt very popular with many people and will most likely never be implemented because of the logistical nightmare it would create. From the title you can probably see that I believe that there should be a simple voter test standardized and implemented across all the states. In order to vote in a federal, state or local election, you need to have taken this test. Much like a test for a drivers license it could be administered to people in high schools and after you pass it once you are registered.
The test itself would be an extremely simple test for anyone that studies for it, im literally talking about 10 questions that would ask something along the lines of “How many branches of government are there?” or “How many people are in each branch?”. These are questions we expect anyone who wants to become a citizen in this country to answer, yet most people cant answer them themselves. The test has to be standardized to avoid discrimination but that will most likely happen anyway which is why both parties dont want a voter test.
The real reason for a voter test is to cut down on the amount of uninformed voters that line up and vote because they have nothing better to do or vote a candidate just because someone told them to. I am not of the belief that voting is a right that anyone should be able to have, in fact neither does the government because if you commit a felony you cant vote. In the same way I believe that voting should be in line with a meritocracy so even the littlest of effort would be rewarded with the privilege. This is something many people would disagree with so it is at a point of agree to disagree for me.
When it comes to my article from a few days ago when I talked about people not having weighted opinions, I believe this carries over to voting as well. People who dont understand basic ideas of how a country is run perhaps shouldnt be voting for us to keep digging ourselves into a hole. Its clear that the government has to cut down on some programs like social security in order to stop running a deficit, but if you go up there and say you are going to cut funding for some programs, you will never be elected. This is a huge problem we actually face.
Who knows if voting tests would even work anyway, I just put the idea out there in a perfect world. They might also just cost too much to institute and the logistical problems like I said would end up being ridiculous. However I think in general even if there were no voter tests that the uninformed voter or the voter who believes everything that is spoon fed to them is a big problem. The political system has many reasons it needs to be fixed, but I doubt we will ever see them occur because the biggest winners are both parties who know they are the only choices in the current system.
-Calaber24p
The only thing these test will do is expand the bureaucracy.
What would be the exact definition of an "uninformed voter?"
I think there are various levels of course. However I would be fine with labeling it at the lowest level by just calling out those who dont know how the system works. If you dont know how many branches we have or what the electoral college is and you still go out and vote, thats a problem.
I think its much more important to know what a candidate or party stands for and wants to achieve than how many branches there are, when going to vote
I agree with you. Vote is a right. Good post.
You got a 31.03% upvote!
Please delegate us Steem Power & get 97% daily rewards share!
20 SP, 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, 300, 500, 1000 or Fill in any amount of SP.
Click For details | Discord server
Politics is draining the money of mind and energy, let people who can afford to think about it
While I do agree that some kind of increase in complexity is needed in the current election systems, I don't think such a solution could effectively solve the problems you are mentioning. The ability to memorize the correct answer to some simple questions is not a good indicator of intelligence, judgment or analytical skills.
I agree but its at least a small barrier that shows that if you are the slightest bit dedicated you can vote.
It's not a bad starting point, yeah. It would certainly help.
It's interesting to me that you use the word "dedication" here. Aren't the people who are not dedicated to democracy simply not voting in the first place?
A very interesting idea, @Calaber24p!
I have actually thought a number of times about the (paramount, long-lasting) problem with completely uninformed, uneducated, and senile voters. I've thought that the criteria could be finished high school and the addition of a max age limit of about 80.
However, your idea about a voting test is even better and more just - I would just expand it in two parts: the basic understanding of politics and the elementary education test.
Great Post..
Thanks for the share dear..
Carry on💘
I think it is necessary because with the test it will produce a bureaucracy that can be relied upon for a success. regards @suhaimiaceh.
you lost me at "should the government".
no it shouldn't, whatever it is. unless maybe dissolving itself?
I'd be happy with just requiring a photo ID that proved you are a citizen.
You don't have to pass a test to vote in the United States, though the notion that voters should understand how the government works, or know the names of their own representatives, before being allowed to enter the voting booth is commonly held.The idea of requiring a test to vote is not as far-fetched as it might seem. Until recent decades, many Americans were forced to pass a test to vote. The discriminatory practice was banned under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Unfortunately I think testing citizens for their right to vote creates two tiers of citizens where one is disenfranchised. The solution to this is simply to improve education by including some sort of civics in schools and encouraging engagement in political discourse.
Interesting article brother!! I think once blockchain is implemented for voting we will start seeing some interesting and positive changes in our democracy. :)
I don't know, I think a test like that would rather proof lazyness than dumbness. I would also assume people that actually know that stuff and are educated would much more likely coincidentally mess off a question than someone who has no interest in politics and googled that stuff 1 hour early. I don't think it proofs anything.
However, I do understand your point and would like it if only people you have taken time to form an opinion would vote, but I don't know if there is a way to assure it even a little.