Responsible Voting
Too many people are voting recently. Well, I guess what I should say is that too many uninformed people are voting. The actual percentage of eligible and informed voters who appear at the polls is declining, which indicates to me that our Grand Republic is suffering a humiliating defeat, that of complacency and laziness. Many times over the past few election cycles I have heard prospective voters publicly and loudly state their blissful ignorance about candidates and issues. “I’ll just choose when I get into the booth.”
Things of this nature, more specifically the uninformed voter, cause me to re-evaluate my support for American voting rights. Should we allow the purposefully ignorant to vote? And how do we determine if someone is “informed enough” to cast his ballot wisely? Should a requirement for a test be made?
I say most emphatically, YES!
The “right” to vote was originally only endowed to “property owners” in post-colonial times. In those days it was thought that only those who contributed to the fledgling nation, by providing jobs and arable land for agriculture, should have a voice in how it all was governed. It wasn’t until the 1860’s that the “right” to vote was extended to all, regardless of property ownership and contribution to the body politic as a whole. One can simply look at what happened to American Politics after that point to determine if the changes were helpful or hazardous.
Politicians began pandering to the lowest common denominator. Gone were ideas for just governance, and come were pandering to the masses with promises of “programs” and gifting from the public treasury to the “less fortunate.”
The civil rights voting act of the 60’s also hurt American independence. Now I am not saying that is was a bad thing to ban discrimination in voting based upon race, color, creed, religion, etc. But what I am saying is, in allowing the ignorant and uninformed to vote; the floodgates of political bovine excrement were opened. All a politician must do to get elected is promise the most, to the largest audience possible, and his election is ensured WHETHER OR NOT HE IS CAPABLE OF DELIVERING ON HIS PROMISES. Of course when politicians realized they could vote from the public treasury funds for themselves and their pet projects, their empty promises took some relative shape.
Back to my point.
There should be some minor qualifications before one may enter the voting booth. Here is what I propose.
1. One must pay income taxes to be eligible to vote. If you receive a full refund at the end of the year, NO VOTE. If you receive the EITC, NO VOTE. If you receive public welfare benefits, NO VOTE. Those who do not contribute financially, but receive from the public coffers, have no interest in being good stewards of the Public’s money. Therefore, they should have NO SAY in how the funds are actually spent. If one decides to take from the productive instead of producing for themselves, they should receive what’s given without complaint, and in no way should be able to influence what others contribute to themselves.
2. A basic test demonstrating your ability to read, write, and speak ENGLISH shall
be completed BEFORE one may be registered as a voter. Federal law requires that foreign aliens who are legally in the United States (in order to receive a Green Card) be “learning English,” and those who apply for citizenship to be fluent in written and spoken English. Obviously only citizens are legally authorized to vote, so this would be a simple test to ensure that foreign aliens, and specifically ILLEGAL ALIENS, are unable to cast a fraudulent ballot.
3. PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP OR NATURALIZATION must be provided to the
Secretary of State before an application for authorization to vote may be certified. NO EXCEPTIONS. Presentation of the registration with photo identification from a recognized organization (school, DMV, Military ID, Passport) must be made before a ballot may be supplied to a perspective voter.
4. A test to in order to demonstrate the perspective voter’s knowledge of current events shall be administered by The Secretary of State, to include basic knowledge of the candidates and issues before a voter’s authorization card could be issued. This would ensure that those who were applying to vote were sufficiently knowledgeable in what was on the ballot to cast an “informed vote.” Obviously the “Motor Voter” law would need to be repealed.
All of these requirements would eliminate great numbers of fraudulent and uninformed votes. Politicians would then be forced to campaign to the informed and base their campaigns upon facts and real ideas, rather than upon innuendo and promises of “benefits” to those who are neither inclined to succeed nor motivated to become self-sufficient.
I predict that were my suggestions to be implemented that the initial outcry would be great, well at least from the usual suspects… However once the public realizes that taxes went down, standards of living went up, and those who were previously non-productive cared little about the changes (blissfully ignorant, remember?), all of the brouhaha would be chocked up to temporary hysteria.
Of course Politicians would have to be bound to their promises, and the liars held criminally accountable. Laws protecting candidates from prosecution for lying during a campaign would be repealed, and proceedings of impeachment should be brought immediately for any conviction of dishonesty. Were that to be made law, I predict candidates would have little to say other than about themselves and their ideas for the betterment of the people. Political parties would disappear as only the individual would matter, and most definitely his character. Felony convictions, and misdemeanors for “moral turpitude” would also be disqualifiers for office.
Anyway, these are my thoughts for protecting the integrity of the election process from enemy’s to the Constitution and the American way of life.
Things of this nature, more specifically the uninformed voter, cause me to re-evaluate my support for American voting rights. Should we allow the purposefully ignorant to vote? And how do we determine if someone is “informed enough” to cast his ballot wisely? Should a requirement for a test be made?
I say most emphatically, YES!
The “right” to vote was originally only endowed to “property owners” in post-colonial times. In those days it was thought that only those who contributed to the fledgling nation, by providing jobs and arable land for agriculture, should have a voice in how it all was governed. It wasn’t until the 1860’s that the “right” to vote was extended to all, regardless of property ownership and contribution to the body politic as a whole. One can simply look at what happened to American Politics after that point to determine if the changes were helpful or hazardous.
Politicians began pandering to the lowest common denominator. Gone were ideas for just governance, and come were pandering to the masses with promises of “programs” and gifting from the public treasury to the “less fortunate.”
The civil rights voting act of the 60’s also hurt American independence. Now I am not saying that is was a bad thing to ban discrimination in voting based upon race, color, creed, religion, etc. But what I am saying is, in allowing the ignorant and uninformed to vote; the floodgates of political bovine excrement were opened. All a politician must do to get elected is promise the most, to the largest audience possible, and his election is ensured WHETHER OR NOT HE IS CAPABLE OF DELIVERING ON HIS PROMISES. Of course when politicians realized they could vote from the public treasury funds for themselves and their pet projects, their empty promises took some relative shape.
Back to my point.
There should be some minor qualifications before one may enter the voting booth. Here is what I propose.
1. One must pay income taxes to be eligible to vote. If you receive a full refund at the end of the year, NO VOTE. If you receive the EITC, NO VOTE. If you receive public welfare benefits, NO VOTE. Those who do not contribute financially, but receive from the public coffers, have no interest in being good stewards of the Public’s money. Therefore, they should have NO SAY in how the funds are actually spent. If one decides to take from the productive instead of producing for themselves, they should receive what’s given without complaint, and in no way should be able to influence what others contribute to themselves.
2. A basic test demonstrating your ability to read, write, and speak ENGLISH shall
be completed BEFORE one may be registered as a voter. Federal law requires that foreign aliens who are legally in the United States (in order to receive a Green Card) be “learning English,” and those who apply for citizenship to be fluent in written and spoken English. Obviously only citizens are legally authorized to vote, so this would be a simple test to ensure that foreign aliens, and specifically ILLEGAL ALIENS, are unable to cast a fraudulent ballot.
3. PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP OR NATURALIZATION must be provided to the
Secretary of State before an application for authorization to vote may be certified. NO EXCEPTIONS. Presentation of the registration with photo identification from a recognized organization (school, DMV, Military ID, Passport) must be made before a ballot may be supplied to a perspective voter.
4. A test to in order to demonstrate the perspective voter’s knowledge of current events shall be administered by The Secretary of State, to include basic knowledge of the candidates and issues before a voter’s authorization card could be issued. This would ensure that those who were applying to vote were sufficiently knowledgeable in what was on the ballot to cast an “informed vote.” Obviously the “Motor Voter” law would need to be repealed.
All of these requirements would eliminate great numbers of fraudulent and uninformed votes. Politicians would then be forced to campaign to the informed and base their campaigns upon facts and real ideas, rather than upon innuendo and promises of “benefits” to those who are neither inclined to succeed nor motivated to become self-sufficient.
I predict that were my suggestions to be implemented that the initial outcry would be great, well at least from the usual suspects… However once the public realizes that taxes went down, standards of living went up, and those who were previously non-productive cared little about the changes (blissfully ignorant, remember?), all of the brouhaha would be chocked up to temporary hysteria.
Of course Politicians would have to be bound to their promises, and the liars held criminally accountable. Laws protecting candidates from prosecution for lying during a campaign would be repealed, and proceedings of impeachment should be brought immediately for any conviction of dishonesty. Were that to be made law, I predict candidates would have little to say other than about themselves and their ideas for the betterment of the people. Political parties would disappear as only the individual would matter, and most definitely his character. Felony convictions, and misdemeanors for “moral turpitude” would also be disqualifiers for office.
Anyway, these are my thoughts for protecting the integrity of the election process from enemy’s to the Constitution and the American way of life.
posted by Medula Oblongata at 2:21 AM
5 comments
