A Call for Voting Reform

[dan4reason]

This thread is based on a paper I wrote. Because it is long first I will give you some selected parts to tell you what my paper is about. After this, I will provide you with my paper. Here are a few quotes.

"One great flaw of democracy is that the people who vote for their representatives in government are not always informed and may not choose the representatives who are intelligent or honest. This problem can be solved by requiring all voters to take a test which rates their critical thinking skills, their knowledge of our founding documents, history, and the issues, and another test which rates their knowledge of the candidates, and recent events, because we need an intelligent electorate to elect responsible and intelligent representatives to deal with the issues facing us today and in the future."

"The purpose of this [first] test is to be an entrance exam for voting, and only has to be taken once. However this entrance exam will be moderately difficult and will require a thorough reading of the textbooks the government will provide. In order to vote, both tests must be passed. The information on the issues will be provided by people from all points of view and collected by the government. This exam will be free and it can be taken online, or at a government facility."

"Voters should have to take a [second] test [...] before every election because recent events and politicians are always changing. Because voters will have to take this test every time they vote, this test will not be difficult and will only take a good reading of material given to them."

"In conclusion, government has been created to benefit society. Governments that last, and can bring prosperity are those which are made up of individuals with the desire, experience, and knowledge to benefit society and make just laws. In our government, the people choose representatives who make laws, but this does not mean that Americans don't have to be intelligent. The ability and morality of our leaders reflects the knowledge and attentiveness of voters. If voters are uninformed, they can easily vote for politicians who are good at making speeches but not laws. They can easily vote for politicians who are corrupt. They can easily vote for politicians who are inexperienced, and they can easily be manipulated by politicians with propaganda. Many Americans are uninformed, and this explains why so many people in government are either corrupt, or do not know what they are doing. We should make tests which rate the knowledge of voters in several vital areas, and this will insure that those who do vote will be more able to make informed votes. Uninformed voting isn't democracy; it’s an abuse of democracy and this practice should be stopped.

"My two voting tests will encourage those who want to vote to get informed, and will discourage those who do not wish to put much thought into the candidates and the issues from voting. Because those who vote will be better informed, they will be better able to pick our leader more wisely, and in general, we will have better leaders to deal with the many issues and problems our nation is facing. The Department of the Bureau records the national deficit on Dec. 8 2009 to be $12,091,292,877,094.86, and this will put financial pressure on future generations (1). The China View, a news organization in China writes that the U.S. government recorded a federal deficit of 1.417 trillion dollars in the fiscal year of 2009 which ended on Sep. 30, and this deficit, which is 10% of the Gross Domestic Product of the United States, needs to be brought down (1). According to Stephen L. Slavin who has a PhD. in economics, in 2008 the federal budget office estimated that the government will pay 8% of its budget on interest on our national debt in 2009. In 2049, 26% of the federal budget will go toward paying interest on our debt (148). These figures were made before the massive deficit spending by the government following the stock market crash in late 2008, so the amount of money we will be paying in interest on our debt may be much higher than these estimates. In 2011, the baby boomers will begin receiving social security. In 2017, the social security tax will not be able to cover social security payments (165). We will either have to raise our national debt even faster, raise taxes, or lower social security benefits. Even with the social security expenditures growing very quickly, Medicare spending will surpass social security spending in 2028 (166). These are some of the many trials and tribulations our nations will be facing, and our recent financial crisis is not helping anything. There are also many opportunities that the future will provide our nation to overcome our challenges and bring prosperity. My voting tests are opportunities in improving our government and our future."

[dan4reason]

Here is part 1 of my paper

A Call for Voting Reform

Every society with a government has had to ask this question: who should govern? This question has long daunted civilization and we have come up with many ingenious ways to answer it. Civilizations throughout history have tried to answer this question by setting up monarchies, aristocracies, oligarchies, and even dictatorships. The problem with these kinds of government is that power is held power by only a minority, and they often used their power to satisfy their selfish desires, even at the expense of the good of the nation. Some have tried to solve this problem by raising up democracies which put power in the hands of the people. However, people are often ignorant, and the squabbling in democracy hampers the state's ability to make strong and intelligent decisions. Democratic republics, which are the governing types we have now, attempts to solve this problem by giving the people the power of electing representatives to govern, and these representatives are able to make the decisions necessary to promote the common good. One great flaw of democracy is that the people who vote for their representatives in government are not always informed and may not choose the representatives who are intelligent or honest. This problem can be solved by requiring all voters to take a test which rates their critical thinking skills, their knowledge of our founding documents, history, and the issues, and another test which rates their knowledge of the candidates, and recent events, because we need an intelligent electorate to elect responsible and intelligent representatives to deal with the issues facing us today and in the future.

We need responsible and intelligent representatives at the helm of our nation because we need the best people possible to protect us from enemies inside and outside our nation, and to make laws which ensure our prosperity and tranquility. The decisions the government makes affect everyone, and affects the future of our nation, whether glorious or disastrous. These decisions are often not easy to make and are controversial. If there was a simple right and wrong in making them, we would not have so much disagreement over what our government should do. For example, an issue that is very complex is global warming. Many scientists say that our climate is getting warmer and that the buildup in greenhouse gasses we have been causing is the culprit. Politicians must decide whether a connection exists between CO2 emissions and our warming climate. After this, they must discover about how much warming our emissions are causing, how much damage this warming can cause, and agree on a course of action which should be taken to stop this warming if it is found that we are causing global warming and we should do something. In order to make this decision, politicians will need extensive knowledge of climate science, and know how climate change affects human civilization. If we are causing global warming and do nothing to stop it, then many people will suffer from rising sea levels, stronger hurricanes, and drought. If we are not causing global warming, and we assume that we are, and cut CO2 emissions, we can create plenty of financial hardship for ourselves.

Politicians also have to deal with other issues, and one of them is economics. Economics is a controversial and complex field, and an understanding of how our economy works is vital to make decisions about it. Many mistakes can be made when politicians try to help the economy and do not anticipate the unintended consequences of their actions. One example of this is given by the U.S. Department of State in an article titled; Smoot-Hawley Tariff. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act passed in 1930 raised tariffs on foreign imports to record levels. This act was passed to help American farmers compete with foreign farmers during the Great Depression. However, this act produced some unintended consequences. After the U.S. raised tariffs on many foreign imports, foreigners raised tariffs on U.S. exports; reducing international trade and making the great depression even worse (1). Politicians also need to have some knowledge of the issues of ethics and philosophy. One issue which depends on this knowledge is the abortion debate. This knowledge is vital to advancing justice and equity. It takes critical, objective, and rational thought on economics, science, and philosophy, in order to be a good representative of the people. A good politician needs experience and knowledge, thinking skills and critical thought, and morals and ethics.

My first voting test will rate people’s knowledge on the different perspectives of the issues, our founding documents, our history, and critical thinking. In order to be able to know which politicians should be elected, voters need to possess at least some basic knowledge of political topics. For example, in order to judge who should be in office to deal with global warming, voters need to have knowledge about global warming and climate science. Voters who are uninformed may vote for politicians who are inexperienced, unintelligent, and corrupt. In order to be able to judge who we need at the head of our nation, we need voters who are familiar with our constitution and founding documents because these documents are the basis of our national government and they give voters an idea on what our government is like. With this knowledge, voters will know the responsibilities and limitations that our constitution imposes on our government and voters can also use their knowledge to see if their representatives have been following our constitution. If our constitution is flawed, voters will have the knowledge to support politicians who will change it. Voters also need to be aware of our national history. Having some knowledge of our past trials and how our leaders reacted to them will give voters some knowledge of the kind of things we need to do in the present and future because history repeats. Voters also need to be informed on the issues facing our nation because this will give them the ability to judge if the actions of their representatives will be beneficial. Politicians will act on their opinions of the issues so it is important that voters have investigated the issues and know both sides to them. It is also important that voters possess basic critical thinking skills in order to judge politicians and decide on what should be done. Many issues, such as the Iraq War and economic issues, require critical thought.

The purpose of this test is to be an entrance exam for voting, and only has to be taken once. However this entrance exam will be moderately difficult and will require a thorough reading of the textbooks the government will provide. In order to vote, both tests must be passed. The information on the issues will be provided by people from all points of view and collected by the government. This exam will be free and it can be taken online, or at a government facility.

Having some knowledge of all this is not enough. Voter must be aware of recent events and news. Knowledge of the battle over healthcare in congress, and swine flu will make voters better able to decide what should be done and who would do it best. Voters must also know about the candidates and what they stand for. In order to judge who should be in government, voters must know who they are judging. Voters should have a general knowledge of the voting records of their representatives. This insures that voters what exactly their representatives are doing. Voters should have to take a test on all this information before every election because recent events and politicians are always changing. Because voters will have to take this test every time they vote, this test will not be difficult and will only take a good reading of material given to them. These tests I have described will insure that voters will be knowledgeable enough to make informed judgments on those who wish to be their government. Isn't it reasonable that judges should have the knowledge and ability to judge?

As it now stands, many Americans voters are woefully lacking in the knowledge I have outlined. This is dangerous to democracy as President John Kennedy said, “The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all" (1). In order for voters to be informed, they must follow recent events and political news. According to Gallup, a leading polling organization, in 2009 36% of Americans followed political news closely, while the other 64% of Americans either follow political news only somewhat closely, not too closely, or not at all closely (2). In 2008, which was the election year in which Barack Obama and John McCain ran for president, 42% of Americans, less than half, payed close attention to political news (1). In the 2008 national elections, 56.8% of Americans voted. Doing the math, this means that at least 14.8% of Americans are uninformed and voted. However, this is assuming that all people who could vote and followed political news closely did vote. Since fewer than 100% of people who followed political news closely voted, more than 14.8% of voters did not care to do a good job of following political news. Even when many Americans followed political news closely, they might not have been informed on the voting record of the candidates. So a large proportion of voters in 2008 were uniformed.

[dan4reason]

Here is part 2 of my paper

There is even more research which illustrates the ignorance of many Americans. Jeff Jacoby, writer for the Boston Globe wrote that, "As Cold War tensions bristled in 1964, only 38 percent of the public knew that the Soviet Union was not a member of NATO. In 1970, only 24 percent could identify the secretary of state. In 1996, The Washington Post reported that 67 percent of Americans could not name their congressman and 94 percent had no idea that William Rehnquist was the chief justice of the United States. Only 26 percent knew that senators serve six-year terms, and 73 percent didn't know that Medicare costs more than foreign aid" (1). How can we expect many Americans to make informed votes when they are ignorant of what is going on in the world? In 2000, only 6% of Americans could name the speaker of the house, while 66% knew who the host of "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" was. In 2004, 65% of Americans did not know that congress had banned partial abortions, and "at least 58 percent say they have heard 'nothing' or 'not much' about the Patriot Act" (1). If many Americans do not know what is going on in the world, are confused about people in government, and are not informed on what their representatives are doing, then how are they able to make informed votes? How would many Americans score on knowledge of their representatives' voting records? How many have checked on their representatives' records?

Because of this horrifying lack of intelligence on the part of voters, many should not be voting and everyone should pass my tests to vote. My voting tests will encourage Americans who want to vote to get informed. However, wouldn't a voting test discourage many voters from voting, and deny voting rights to those who don't pass the test? Won't it make our nation less democratic by putting limits on democracy? This test will discourage voters who do not wish to educate themselves from voting, and it takes voting rights from those who are uninformed. However, having the right things done in our nation, and having the right leaders is more important than allowing uninformed people to make uninformed votes. Giving uninformed voters the right to vote harms the nation as a whole because our nation will be less likely to have leaders who will make wise, moral, and knowledgeable decisions.

Some try to explain away the ignorance of the public by bringing up the "miracle of aggregation." Christopher Shea of Salon.com writes that this theory suggests that ignorant voters who vote, vote more or less randomly. According to this idea, the votes of the ignorant tend to cancel each other out so the votes that really count are those of the informed. However, ignorant voters do not vote randomly (1). They will often vote for candidates who are good at projecting themselves. Many will vote for candidates they have heard positive things about, and will not vote for those they have not cared to learn about. This is one reason candidates post signs around areas where voters are. Many voters will not put forth the effort to learn about the candidates, so candidates try to get their names out through signs, and TV ads. What this means is that the candidate with the most financial support will very likely be elected because they will be able to get their names out. The election of candidates should not depend on this, but on the ideas and credentials of the candidates. If voters were informed, they would vote for many candidates with good records and ideas who do not necessarily have as much funding as their opponents.

Many politicians' use of propaganda to deceive and distort the perceptions of voters can also insure that dishonest politicians are getting elected. Stephen Ducat of the Huffington Post categorizes and uncovers many types of propaganda. Propaganda can be used by authority to make the "mob" obedient and subservient to it. An example of this is the propaganda of Nazi Germany when Hitler encouraged Germans to be obedient to him. Propaganda can also be used to scare people and make them angry and afraid of authority. Some have tried to misinform people by saying, "the healthcare bill in Congress if passed will set up death panels for the elderly." This is of course a myth. Propaganda is often used to take advantage of voters' emotions. It can also spread lies and twist the truth (1). Many TV campaign ads are examples of propaganda because they try to get the viewer to emotionally support a candidate. These ads are often what voters base their votes on. Sometimes propaganda is hypocritical. For example in an editorial, the New York Times writes that John McCain accused Barack Obama of being involved with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and other lobbyists. However, his own campaign manager was involved with Freddie Mac, and McCain's own brain trust included many lobbyists (1). Propaganda gives politicians the power to manipulate the minds and hearts of the populace and helps them get elected.

Uninformed voting may actually be rational because doing the research in order to be informed may take hours and every individual vote does not influence the outcome of a race very much. Why should I spend hours reading up on the issues, thinking about the issues, researching economic theories and global warming theories, looking through the voting records of my representatives, and looking at the political news, when my vote is only 1 out of several million? The cost for many people is greater than the benefit of making an informed vote. It is much easier to vote with incomplete information. Many of us have busy lives and it is just not worth it to be informed. My tests will not insure that voters are perfectly informed, but it will insure that voters will have a good deal of knowledge. It is vital that we have good leaders to face the challenges we have today.

In conclusion, government has been created to benefit society. Governments that last, and can bring prosperity are those which are made up of individuals with the desire, experience, and knowledge to benefit society and make just laws. In our government, the people choose representatives who make laws, but this does not mean that Americans don't have to be intelligent. The ability and morality of our leaders reflects the knowledge and attentiveness of voters. If voters are uninformed, they can easily vote for politicians who are good at making speeches but not laws. They can easily vote for politicians who are corrupt. They can easily vote for politicians who are inexperienced, and they can easily be manipulated by politicians with propaganda. Many Americans are uninformed, and this explains why so many people in government are either corrupt, or do not know what they are doing. We should make tests which rate the knowledge of voters in several vital areas, and this will insure that those who do vote will be more able to make informed votes. Uninformed voting isn't democracy; it’s an abuse of democracy and this practice should be stopped.

My two voting tests will encourage those who want to vote to get informed, and will discourage those who do not wish to put much thought into the candidates and the issues from voting. Because those who vote will be better informed, they will be better able to pick our leader more wisely, and in general, we will have better leaders to deal with the many issues and problems our nation is facing. The Department of the Bureau records the national deficit on Dec. 8 2009 to be $12,091,292,877,094.86, and this will put financial pressure on future generations (1). The China View, a news organization in China writes that the U.S. government recorded a federal deficit of 1.417 trillion dollars in the fiscal year of 2009 which ended on Sep. 30, and this deficit, which is 10% of the Gross Domestic Product of the United States, needs to be brought down (1). According to Stephen L. Slavin who has a PhD. in economics, in 2008 the federal budget office estimated that the government will pay 8% of its budget on interest on our national debt in 2009. In 2049, 26% of the federal budget will go toward paying interest on our debt (148). These figures were made before the massive deficit spending by the government following the stock market crash in late 2008, so the amount of money we will be paying in interest on our debt may be much higher than these estimates. In 2011, the baby boomers will begin receiving social security. In 2017, the social security tax will not be able to cover social security payments (165). We will either have to raise our national debt even faster, raise taxes, or lower social security benefits. Even with the social security expenditures growing very quickly, Medicare spending will surpass social security spending in 2028 (166). These are some of the many trials and tribulations our nations will be facing, and our recent financial crisis is not helping anything. There are also many opportunities that the future will provide our nation to overcome our challenges and bring prosperity. My voting tests are opportunities in improving our government and our future.

[dan4reason]

Here is my bibliography

Bovard, James. "The Greatest Ignorance of the Greatest Number." Freedom Daily. 3 Sep. 2003. The Future of Freedom Foundation. 22 Nov. 2009. <http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0308d.asp>

Ducat, Stephen. "Propaganda 101: How to Decode Political Ads." The Huffington Post. 29 Sep. 2008. 22 Nov. 2009. < http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-ducat/propaganda-101-how-to-dec_b_130119.html>

Editorial. "One Man's Crony ...." The New York Times. 8 Oct. 2008. 22 Nov. 2009. <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/opinion/09thu4.html?_r=1>

Jacoby, Jeff. "The ignorant American voter." The Boston Globe. 24 Oct. 2004. Globe Newspaper Company. 11 Nov. 2009. <The ignorant American voter - The Boston Globe >

Lei, Yang. "Deficit control 'tough task' for U.S. gov't: U.S. expert." China View. 11 Nov. 2009. Xinhua News Agency. 22 Nov. 2009. <http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-11/11/content_12427743.htm>

Saad, Lydia. "More Americans Plugged into political news." Gallup. 28 Sep. 2009. 23 Nov. 2009. <http://www.gallup.com/poll/123203/americans-plugged-into-political-news.aspx>

Shea, Christopher. "Is voter ignorance killing democracy." Salon Media Group. 22 Nov, 1999. 12 Nov. 2009. <http://www.salon.com/books/it/1999/11/22/voter/print.html>

Slavin, Stephen L.. Economics. Ed. Douglas Reigner. New York: The McGraw-Hills Companies Inc., 2008.

United States. Dept. of State. Smoot-Hawley Tariff. 22 Nov. 2009. <http://future.state.gov/when/timeline/1921_timeline/smoot_tariff.html>



United States. Dept. of the Treasury. Bureau of the Public Debt. The Daily History of the Debt Results. 19 Nov. 2009. 22 Nov. 2009. <http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np>

Sorry I took up so much space, however I have shown you my argument. What do you think?

[Angry Citizen]

I confess that I didn't read all of it, because your solution is currently impossible.

Originally, the Founders foresaw the very same problem you did. Senators, prior to the 17th amendment, were appointed through state legislators in order to ensure that the Senate was populated with the so-called 'best' while the population retained a level of control by electing their state legislators. The Electoral College, far from being the almost-completely-predictable entity it is now, was once rather chaotic. So-called 'faithless electors' were much more common back then. None of the Founders wanted a direct democracy to take place, and all were very much afraid of 'too much democracy'. Too much democracy, they felt, would lead to anarchy. This was a common complaint in nearly every political system since the first attempt at democracy in Athens.

There were also numerous requirements for voting in the 17th, 18th and parts of the 19th centuries as well. You typically had to be a) white, b) member of the local Church, c) an owner of property, d) male, and e) meet a certain age requirement. B was largely eradicated by the 19th century, A eradicated after the 14th amendment, D after the 19th, E decreased after the 26th, and C during the mid 19th century. Society once had safeguards to ensure that only 'qualified' members would be eligible to exert political influence - whether these safeguards make sense or not is another debate, but the point was, the Founders took steps to ensure that not everyone could vote.

However, the 14th amendment is extremely important. It guarantees equal protection under the law. The equal protection clause, as defined in numerous court cases (grandfather clause, etc.), explicitly forbids the government from denying the right to vote to any legal citizen of the United States. Even the instances where felons are forbidden are questionably constitutional - they just haven't yet been challenged, AFAIK.

It would require an amendment to repeal the most important amendment in the Constitution. Amendments require 3/4th of the state legislators and 2/3rds of both chambers of Congress to pass. What you speak of - making the voting public be informed - would be political suicide, even ignoring the fact that most of the crooks would be voted out by the informed citizenry. Your proposal doesn't have a chance in hell of passing. None whatsoever.

[Zeebadee]

"The purpose of this [first] test is to be an entrance exam for voting, and only has to be taken once. However this entrance exam will be moderately difficult and will require a thorough reading of the textbooks the government will provide. In order to vote, both tests must be passed. The information on the issues will be provided by people from all points of view and collected by the government. This exam will be free and it can be taken online, or at a government facility."

"Voters should have to take a [second] test [...] before every election because recent events and politicians are always changing. Because voters will have to take this test every time they vote, this test will not be difficult and will only take a good reading of material given to them."

This is a horrible idea. The government will supply and administer a test, based on materials the government supplies, the government will interpret the results and decide who gets to vote . You really don't see a problem with this??

[WindWip]

Great idea Dan! I've been advocating that idea for a long time myself.

[WindWip]

There were also numerous requirements for voting in the 17th, 18th and parts of the 19th centuries as well. You typically had to be a) white, b) member of the local Church, c) an owner of property, d) male, and e) meet a certain age requirement. B was largely eradicated by the 19th century, A eradicated after the 14th amendment, D after the 19th, E decreased after the 26th, and C during the mid 19th century. Society once had safeguards to ensure that only 'qualified' members would be eligible to exert political influence - whether these safeguards make sense or not is another debate, but the point was, the Founders took steps to ensure that not everyone could vote.

However, the 14th amendment is extremely important. It guarantees equal protection under the law. The equal protection clause, as defined in numerous court cases (grandfather clause, etc.), explicitly forbids the government from denying the right to vote to any legal citizen of the United States. Even the instances where felons are forbidden are questionably constitutional - they just haven't yet been challenged, AFAIK.

The obvious challenge to the 14th amendment argument is the age barrier. There is still a requirement on age. The requirement is a good one (though one can argue the age itself), because it prevents a large number of voters who are not always informed and who do not always have great critical thinking capabilities from voting.

The same reasoning applies to adults who are not informed and who do not have acceptable critical thinking capabilities. Why should we restrict one class of citizen for one reason and not another class for the same reason?

[WindWip]

This is a horrible idea. The government will supply and administer a test, based on materials the government supplies, the government will interpret the results and decide who gets to vote . You really don't see a problem with this??

As long as the results are shown to the tester, the answers are clearly either correct or incorrect, and the test is highly standardized, there is no problem with it at all.

The example from the late 1700s regarding reading requirements is not the same, because of those requirements I just stated. It is not a person who decides who votes, it's the test.

[Angry Citizen]

Why should we restrict one class of citizen for one reason and not another class for the same reason?

Likely because it a) hasn't been challenged yet, and b) it holds no precedence. The Supreme Court would likely not apply the 14th amendment to those under 18.

[WindWip]

Likely because it a) hasn't been challenged yet, and b) it holds no precedence. The Supreme Court would likely not apply the 14th amendment to those under 18.

Realistically I think I agree with you, I don't see this change happening anytime soon. In theory I think it's a great method of voting though.

[Apeman81]

"One great flaw of democracy is that the people who vote for their representatives in government are not always informed and may not choose the representatives who are intelligent or honest.”

A flawed premise. Our elected officials are supposed to represent the people of their districts, for better or worse. If the electorate is uniformed, then so be it. The electorate has the power to get informed and change elected officials. It takes a single voting cycle to greatly impact the makeup of government.

BTW. “Intelligent and honest” can be corrupted as easily as anything else given time.

The key is to cycle new representatives into office to avoid the corruption of power.

Which the poor electorate can do anytime it feels like getting of its duff to do.