Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 12-29-2005, 06:29 PM
bobman0330 bobman0330 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 52
Default Re: Conditional Suffrage?

The real problem in my mind is not that voters are stupid, but that people who choose to vote (an unreasonable act if you consider objective benefits) are either: a) irrational, or b) derive some sort of self-satisfaction from voting. This seems very undesirable to me. Instead, I propose the following system for federal elections:

1. Every election cycle, 10% of the population will be chosen to vote. It will go sequentially by the last digit of your SSN. 2000 will be the 1s, 2002 the 2s, etc.
2. Voters will be required to attend a half-day or so presentation. Candidates will write their own presentation material. (possibly with some sort of limitations, e.g., no more than 20 minutes of the presentation can contain material about an opposition candidate.) Voters may take as many notes as they like.
3. A non-partisan government committee will compose a test consisting of a number of factual multiple choice questions about the material presented. Voters may refer to any notes they have taken. Voters who fail will be fined ~$500.
4. Voters who pass vote.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-29-2005, 06:37 PM
tylerdurden tylerdurden is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: actually pvn
Posts: 0
Default Re: Conditional Suffrage?

[ QUOTE ]
I also suspect the same people who propose such tests, when they find themselves disenfranchised for not being able to answer what are rather simple questions posed by our intellectual overlords, would accuse said overlords of terrible elitism and ivory-tower subjugation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't they tacitly consent to such subjugation just by "being here"? Hey, they should probably move somewhere else.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-29-2005, 06:47 PM
Warik Warik is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 436
Default Re: Conditional Suffrage?

[ QUOTE ]
First of all, it's against the law in all States to take any disciplinary action against employees who take time off from work to vote.

[/ QUOTE ]

Disciplinary, no, but those who need to punch a time clock won't be paid for the time they missed.

[ QUOTE ]
Second, polls are open in most states from 7 AM - 8 PM. I would suggest that only a miniscule percentage of the electorate needs to miss more than an hour or two of work to vote.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you're living paycheck to paycheck, an hour or two of work is significant.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with forcing employers to pay for the missed time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nor do I... that's the only way having election day be on a day when 99% of the working population works would make sense, though.

Better to just change the day.

But let's not get off topic.... we're talking about restricting the right to vote of otherwise eligible voters.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-29-2005, 07:01 PM
OtisTheMarsupial OtisTheMarsupial is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 571
Default Conditional Suffrage? The answer is no.

Your idea is horrible.

Educated people already vote much more often than uneducated.

In 2004, 23% of people who hadn't finished 10th grade voted, whereas 77% of people with advanced degrees voted. 52% of high school grads who didn't go to college voted and 72% of bachelor degree holders voted.

http://www.census.gov/population/soc...04/tab05-1.xls

Where'd you even get this idea? From your subjective view that voters are uneducated? Take a look at the statistics. The people you want to restrict from voting already don't vote.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-29-2005, 07:20 PM
Warik Warik is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 436
Default Re: Conditional Suffrage?

[ QUOTE ]
Didn't they used to do this in the south? I don't think this is a good idea because of how easily it is to misuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

They did it based on race. That wasn't what I was proposing. Read my post.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-29-2005, 07:23 PM
Warik Warik is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 436
Default Re: Conditional Suffrage?

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, if people are annoyed with the way politics work today (which everyone should be) they should probably not focus on disenfrancising people of which they think less

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that I don't think highly of someone doesn't automatically mean I don't want them to vote, nor does the fact that I do think highly of someone mean that I DO want them to vote.

Example: I don't think highly of overpaid NY transit workers who went on strike to get more money; however, a lot of them are competent enough to vote.

Other example: I think highly of my friends, but a few of them are too stupid to vote for president.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-29-2005, 07:26 PM
Warik Warik is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 436
Default Re: Conditional Suffrage?

[ QUOTE ]
I think the test should be fahioned not on candidates but on The Consitution, ethics, and government knowledge.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

[ QUOTE ]
I also wonder how many polititians would be able to pass it?

[/ QUOTE ]

The left would claim the test is racist.

[ QUOTE ]
There needs to be a migration from representative democracy toward mob rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

fyp
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-29-2005, 07:32 PM
QuadsOverQuads QuadsOverQuads is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 26
Default Re: Conditional Suffrage?

[ QUOTE ]
First of all, it's against the law in all States to take any disciplinary action against employees who take time off from work to vote.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to see a cite on that. My understanding is that only about 20 states actually have such laws, and that the time allowed is not necessarily sufficient to cover the actual time needed to stand in line and cast a vote (ie: Ohio 2004).


q/q
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-29-2005, 07:33 PM
Warik Warik is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 436
Default Re: Conditional Suffrage?

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with conditional suffrage is that it will ALWAYS be used to ensure those who favor your political positions will vote and those who disfavor them will not. In short, it will always be abused.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see the point you're trying to make describing the discussion with your father in-law, but I don't agree that conditional suffrage will necessarily always be used to one party's advantage. In fact, it doesn't have to be.

Having a high school diploma or owning property are all arbitrary criteria that says nothing about one individual's ability to cast a competent vote. How many unintelligent people do you encounter on a daily basis who have high school diplomas? How many intelligent people with significant accomplishments dropped out of high school or college? Plenty on both counts.

The fact is that no one here can make a compelling argument in favor of EVERYONE who is currently eligible to vote is competent enough to make an informed decision (I challenge you to try, though). Knowing this, there should definitely be some sort of system in place to weed out many of those individuals.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-29-2005, 07:42 PM
tylerdurden tylerdurden is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: actually pvn
Posts: 0
Default Re: Conditional Suffrage?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First of all, it's against the law in all States to take any disciplinary action against employees who take time off from work to vote.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to see a cite on that. My understanding is that only about 20 states actually have such laws, and that the time allowed is not necessarily sufficient to cover the actual time needed to stand in line and cast a vote (ie: Ohio 2004).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is correct. There is no uniform federal law regarding this. I believe the number of states that have laws requiring employers to give time off is closer to 30, but as you point out, some of them don't require very much.

Part of the reason that there is no uniform federal law about this is that there is no uniform federal election.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.