Conditional Suffrage?

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
It's worse than that. Convict political enemies of some vague "undermining national interests" felony and they can't vote you out of office.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although in dire worst case scenarios that potential might be true though highly improbable, I would estimate that the number of such convicted felons is now close to zero. Whereas the class of convicted felons who are murderers, rapists, pedophiles and armed robbers without voting rights runs into the hundreds of thousands. And of course those persons would all vote democratic since they know who is the weakest on crime and punishment and places the rights of criminal perpetrators higher than that of victims.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's worse than that. Convict political enemies of some vague "undermining national interests" felony and they can't vote you out of office.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although in dire worst case scenarios that potential might be true though highly improbable, I would estimate that the number of such convicted felons is now close to zero . . .

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, the number must easily be in the hundreds of thousands, if not the millions. A large fraction of our prison population is made up of political prisoners who have never stolen a dollar or doughnut nor harmed anyone, but who upon their release cannot vote out the despicable [censored] who ruined their lives.

Great system.

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
It's worse than that. Convict political enemies of some vague "undermining national interests" felony and they can't vote you out of office.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize you have to actually commit a real crime before you can be considered a convicted felon, right? Last time I checked, "vaguely undermining national interests" wasn't a crime.

[CORed]

In theory, I don't think some kind of qualification to vote is a terrible idea, whether it's some sort of test of intelligence, general knowledge, or even what Heinlein suggested in Starship Troopers, limitng the vote to people who had served in the military (under which I would not be qualified, btw). In practice, I think such a system could be easily manipulated, as the "literacy tests" in the southen states were to exclude black people from voting. Also, I think there is nearly zero chance of it ever happening in this country, because democracy and universal adult suffrage have become such sacred cows, even though the Founding Fathers considered it something to be feared.

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
limitng the vote to people who had served in the military (under which I would not be qualified, btw).

[/ QUOTE ]

This part I don't agree with. There are plenty of people who have not served in the military who are qualified to vote, and many who have who are not.

[ QUOTE ]
In practice, I think such a system could be easily manipulated, as the "literacy tests" in the southen states were to exclude black people from voting.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because "literacy tests" in the South were designed to exclude and there was nobody around to prevent that from happening. With all the of civil liberties groups out there for any demographic, the likelihood of an unfairly discriminatory test coming to pass is small.

I'm not talking about a lengthy, complicated, SAT-like procedure. Even a BASIC, FACT-BASED multiple choice & true or false test will significantly improve the voting pool.

You'll kill off hundreds of thousands of voters with a "Does the Constitution guarantee your right to an abortion [true/false]" question.

You'll probably kill off a million voters with this question:

"The Bill of Rights guarantees you the right to which of the following:
a) free education
b) free healthcare
c) a job
d) all of the above
e) none of the above"

Are people who don't even know what their rights are really qualified to choose who is going to help decide what everyone else's rights are for years to come?

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I think there is nearly zero chance of it ever happening in this country, because democracy and universal adult suffrage have become such sacred cows, even though the Founding Fathers considered it something to be feared.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh I definitely agree.... none of this will ever happen unfortunately... but we can dream, can't we?

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In practice, I think such a system could be easily manipulated, as the "literacy tests" in the southen states were to exclude black people from voting.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because "literacy tests" in the South were designed to exclude and there was nobody around to prevent that from happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, your proposed "competence test" is NOT designed to exclude people from voting???

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In practice, I think such a system could be easily manipulated, as the "literacy tests" in the southen states were to exclude black people from voting.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because "literacy tests" in the South were designed to exclude and there was nobody around to prevent that from happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, your proposed "competence test" is NOT designed to exclude people from voting???

[/ QUOTE ]

My competence test is not designed to unfairly exclude people on the basis of race, like the southern "literacy tests" were.

Please refrain from taking what I say out of context.

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In practice, I think such a system could be easily manipulated, as the "literacy tests" in the southen states were to exclude black people from voting.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because "literacy tests" in the South were designed to exclude and there was nobody around to prevent that from happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, your proposed "competence test" is NOT designed to exclude people from voting???

[/ QUOTE ]

My competence test is not designed to unfairly exclude people on the basis of race, like the southern "literacy tests" were.

Please refrain from taking what I say out of context.

[/ QUOTE ]

What was out of context? The old tests were designed to exclude people that were disfavored by those in power. Your proposed test is designed to exclude people that you personally don't favor. The people they sought to exclude and the people that you seek to exclude were defined by different criteria, to be sure, but the goal is effectively the same.