# You don't get to vote unless: **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 12, 2012, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971 "2012-07-12T05:13:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Enkel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/df705f/32.png) [@Enkel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enkel)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/121 "2012-07-12T20:03:03Z")
> [@raspberry\_hunter](#): > > (Actually, that’s an idea! Ask people _logic_ and statistics questions! Only the people who understand that A implies B does NOT mean that B implies A get to vote! When I run for office, this’ll be my platform… I anticipate a whole two people voting for me!) Oh, oh… an please add correlation vs causation… if you do, I’ll vote for you! ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/122 "2012-07-12T20:03:46Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > Sigh. Most people consider senators not to be congresspersons though in fact, they are. Common usage often refers to the House of Representatives as “Congress,” exclusive of the Senate. > > In my OP, I differentiated between voting for a senator and voting for a congressman. Now, let’s get off this tangent–(“he doesn’t know the difference between the House and the Senate so what’s he doing talking about a civics test for voters, neener neener neener”–childish). I understand, but answer the question. What percentage of people would you expect to be disenfranchised? Oh, and by loading a a test with questions like this (that you don’t seem to like) – that is, questions that have commonly believed answers that are nevertheless wrong, you can skew the results to disenfranchise more people. Or are you in fact skewing the results? It is a legitimate civics question – does the fact that 66% (or whatever majority you want) will get the answer wrong mean anything? If you make up a series of questions about what powers of government are exercised by which branches of government, you could probably eliminate more than half of the electorate. Keep in mind that voter participation is typically down around 50% already. How small can the voting population be allowed to get? ---
**Author:** ![raspberry\_hunter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@raspberry\_hunter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raspberry_hunter)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/123 "2012-07-12T20:06:53Z")
> [@Enkel](#): > > Oh, oh… an please add correlation vs causation… if you do, I’ll vote for you! YES, and with pleasure. That’s arguably even more important, isn’t it? Another vote for meeee! ---
**Author:** ![greenslime1951](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e9bcb4/32.png) [@greenslime1951](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/greenslime1951)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/124 "2012-07-12T20:10:59Z")
> [@raspberry\_hunter](#): > > (Actually, that’s an idea! Ask people _logic_ and statistics questions! Only the people who understand that A implies B does NOT mean that B implies A get to vote! When I run for office, this’ll be my platform… I anticipate a whole two people voting for me!) It would almost certainly produce a better-functioning society. I would, for example, in lieu of my proposal, be happy with forcing everyone to demonstrate their understanding of the concept, “correlation does not equal causation” before they were allowed to vote. Systems where only the smartest people were allowed to vote, I believe, would be much better than present systems. And you know what? I would be perfectly happy were I, myself disfranchised under such a system. I would be perfectly happy with putting the governance of the country into the hands of people who were smarter than me. Democracy doesn’t always produce the most human happiness, not by a long shot. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_T](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Gary\_T](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_T)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/125 "2012-07-12T20:15:06Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > No, most people equate “Congress” with the “House of Representatives,” not the two branches. Specifically, they don’t consider their senators to be congressmen, even though technically, they are. > > I suppose I could dig up a couple thousand citations where the two branches were referred to as “Congress and the Senate,” but I’m not inclined to do so for something that’s peripheral to the discussion. I agree that the correct usage is “the House and the Senate.” Moving on… While I disagree with the OP’s opinion on the main subject of this thread, I do agree with him here. Come on, folks, you’d have to have been living under a rock to not know that members of the House are commonly – _very commonly_ – called congressmen, as opposed to members of the Senate being called senators. Yes, technically Congress is comprised of both the Senate and the House, but that’s not the point. I learned this before eighth grade. Everybody – except those picking a nit here – knows just what is meant when they hear or read “congressman Joe Blow.” Let this one die. ---
**Author:** ![greenslime1951](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e9bcb4/32.png) [@greenslime1951](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/greenslime1951)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/126 "2012-07-12T20:16:56Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > I How small can the voting population be allowed to get? Ideally, about the smartest 1-2% of the population (measured objectively). Just like in ancient Athens (the fact that women were excluded aside). The House/Senate/Congress thing is a matter of commonly used terminology. Any careful construction of a voting test would avoid any such confusion, as all standardized tests try to do. So, it would be “How many persons are in the House of Representatives? How many in the Senate?” not, “How many persons are in Congress?” Obviously, problems of this nature would have to be carefully screened for. I don’t think, as many posters have opined, that constructing a fair and unbiased test would be impossible. Difficult, yes, but not insurmountably so. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/127 "2012-07-12T20:18:48Z")
He’s the one who proposed that there be a test, with _right_ and _wrong_ answers. A formal civics test would have to be based on the rigorous terminology of the bicameral legislature. ---
**Author:** ![Enkel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/df705f/32.png) [@Enkel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enkel)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/128 "2012-07-12T20:18:58Z")
> [@raspberry\_hunter](#): > > YES, and with pleasure. That’s arguably even more important, isn’t it? > > Another vote for meeee! No, if you vote for my scheme, that will be 15,000+ votes for you! ---
**Author:** ![greenslime1951](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e9bcb4/32.png) [@greenslime1951](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/greenslime1951)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/129 "2012-07-12T20:19:25Z")
> [@Gary\_T](#): > > While I disagree with the OP’s opinion on the main subject of this thread, I do agree with him here. Come on, folks, you’d have to have been living under a rock to not know that members of the House are commonly – _very commonly_ – called congressmen, as opposed to members of the Senate being called senators. Yes, technically Congress is comprised of both the Senate and the House, but that’s not the point. I learned this before eighth grade. Everybody – except those picking a nit here – knows just what is meant when they hear or read “congressman Joe Blow.” Let this one die. Well, of course they knew it–they were just being snarky. A tired internet tactic is to try to discredit someone’s argument by finding some trivial error–or “error”–in their post and beating him over the head with it. It’s much less effort than actually coming up with a cogent counter-argument. ---
**Author:** ![Enkel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/df705f/32.png) [@Enkel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enkel)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/130 "2012-07-12T20:28:22Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > Ideally, about the smartest 1-2% of the population (measured objectively). Just like in ancient Athens (the fact that women were excluded aside). Okay, before you seemed ‘troll-ish’ but now you sound like a flat out troll. You joined Jul 2nd and average 32 posts/day in about 10 days (yup, over 300 posts). This isn’t a discussion, this is just troll bait. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/131 "2012-07-12T20:39:03Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > Ideally, about the smartest 1-2% of the population (measured objectively). Just like in ancient Athens (the fact that women were excluded aside). > > The House/Senate/Congress thing is a matter of commonly used terminology. Any careful construction of a voting test would avoid any such confusion, as all standardized tests try to do. So, it would be “How many persons are in the House of Representatives? How many in the Senate?” not, “How many persons are in Congress?” > > Obviously, problems of this nature would have to be carefully screened for. I don’t think, as many posters have opined, that constructing a fair and unbiased test would be impossible. Difficult, yes, but not insurmountably so. None of your suggested questions is adequate. “How many persons are in the House of Representives?” On what day and at what time? How many electoral seats are there in the House of Representatives would be a more accurate question IMO, though you may disagree. Also, you cannot offer standardized tests of you are going to add questions specific to each and every referendum/initiative/constitutional amendment/ bond issue that end up on thousands of state, county and city ballots. I repeat my earlier questions. Who is going to write these test questions? Who is going to decide what is a correct answer? And new questions – will there be any public review of the proposed questions and and answers before the election? Will individuals or interest groups have any say in the content or the wording of the questions or answers? Or will individuals just have to sue of they can’t vote. You also seem to be proposing that voters may be disenfranchised for one vote, but not another, on the same ballot. Is this correct? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/132 "2012-07-12T20:52:55Z")
> [@Gary\_T](#): > > While I disagree with the OP’s opinion on the main subject of this thread, I do agree with him here. Come on, folks, you’d have to have been living under a rock to not know that members of the House are commonly – _very commonly_ – called congressmen, as opposed to members of the Senate being called senators. Yes, technically Congress is comprised of both the Senate and the House, but that’s not the point. I learned this before eighth grade. Everybody – except those picking a nit here – knows just what is meant when they hear or read “congressman Joe Blow.” Let this one die. Yes, but the real question is, would it be fair or unfair to ask such a question on a test to prove your knowledge of how government works? Does the fact that most people (supposedly) don’t understand that the Senate is a part of Congress put a question about it out of bounds? Who gets to make that decision? And if the OP wants to limit the franchise to 1% or 2% of the population, there are going to have to be a lot of questions just like it – intended to suggest wrong answers that many folks believe are right. ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/133 "2012-07-12T20:59:47Z")
> [@Gary\_T](#): > > While I disagree with the OP’s opinion on the main subject of this thread, I do agree with him here. Come on, folks, you’d have to have been living under a rock to not know that members of the House are commonly – _very commonly_ – called congressmen, as opposed to members of the Senate being called senators. Yes, technically Congress is comprised of both the Senate and the House, but that’s not the point. I learned this before eighth grade. Everybody – except those picking a nit here – knows just what is meant when they hear or read “congressman Joe Blow.” Let this one die. I actually didn’t realize this. I assumed that when people said “Congressman” they meant “person serving in the US Congress, could be a senator or a representative.” I’m not being snarky or trying to BS you. The bicameral legislature was taught pretty thoroughly in my grade-school social studies and civics classes, so I just figured everyone knew this stuff. Also, this rock is very comfortable, so don’t knock it until you’ve tried it. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/134 "2012-07-12T21:01:33Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > That’s pretty much my point–they are a group that _chose_ to become educated in English. Such choice is freely available (including the choice to _not_ learn English and remain marginalized). They’re only “freely available” in a very narrow sense of the term. It might not be possible for some people to take such classes, monetary reasons, logistical reasons, or other reasons. You ignore that there are _reasons_ that they might be self-selected, among the reasons I listed above. Really, the point seems to be that you don’t really care there might be actual reasons that some people don’t have a certain level of English ability. You’re comfortable broad-brushing them as stupid or lazy, when exactly the opposite might be the case. > [@](#): > > Many posters, yourself included, have objected to a voter qualification test as exclusionary. I really doubt that requiring voters to have an eighth-grade education excludes very many people at all. It doesn’t matter how many. If you are proposing an exclusionary test, you contemplate excluding _somebody_ and that is too many. All members of society have a stake in their government, and in a democratic system a government derives its legitimacy from the consent of the governed. Now, we make certain exceptions for age – we are forced, for practical reasons, to choose an arbitrary age of majority, and that has in the recent past been reduced from 21 to 18. However, barring that practical limitation, it is unconscionable to limit the franchise based on these kind of “good enough for me” criteria. In order to be a member of a democratic society, you have to accept that you have equal voice with people you might not respect or people whose inner workings you have suspicions about. Erecting qualification tests is going backwards in history. We have over many decades struggled to free ourselves from the chains of “only my kind of American is a real American” thinking. We’re not even finished doing that; there is no way we’re going backward. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/135 "2012-07-12T21:04:24Z")
> [@Gary\_T](#): > > While I disagree with the OP’s opinion on the main subject of this thread, I do agree with him here. Come on, folks, you’d have to have been living under a rock to not know that members of the House are commonly – _very commonly_ – called congressmen, as opposed to members of the Senate being called senators. Yes, technically Congress is comprised of both the Senate and the House, but that’s not the point. I learned this before eighth grade. Everybody – except those picking a nit here – knows just what is meant when they hear or read “congressman Joe Blow.” Let this one die. While “congressman” is often used informally to refer to a U.S. representative and is implied not to be a U.S. senator, the word “congressional” is not in a general sense commonly used to refer to the House of Representatives exclusive of the Senate. ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/136 "2012-07-12T21:09:04Z")
The OP’s premise flawed…and he knows it. He caveated in the OP. Hell, if you were going to have a theoretical test to establish a learned electorate, don’t just stop at an 8th grade education. But **we all** know that would never work. The percentage of the population left to actually vote would be so small. It’s the same reason we don’t have a test to gain a user id and start posting around here. It would be an awfully lonely place. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/137 "2012-07-12T21:13:26Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > Would it confer any benefit, or cause any harm? Since this is the OP’s idea, I would like him to show what benefit this test would confer. ---
**Author:** ![Acid\_Lamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Acid\_Lamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acid_Lamp)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/138 "2012-07-12T21:25:26Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Sorry, **Acid Lamp** , your ‘simple’ example has at least two correct answers from one point of view, and NONE from another POV. ‘Unsure’ is an absolutely and unambiguously correct answer if you are not in fact sure of the definition. And many, maybe most, “right to lifers” support the right to abortion in some cases and not in others. A lot of them would disagree that any of these answers is a correct definition, because they self-identify with the term “right to life” but not how you and your test would define it. > > And then there are all kinds of crazy shit that gets onto ballots, for instance (IMO) the ‘personhood’ initiative in last election in Mississippi that defined a human egg to be a person the moment of conception. Is your test going to ask, or say, anything about the consequences of such a vote – such as possibly criminalizing some forms of contraception? And even worse shit could show up – I can easily imagine some yahoos getting something on a ballot that says “No mosques can be built in our city.” Is your test going to ask, “Does this referendum meet the criteria of freedom of religion as laid out in the constitution?” > > But writing and scoring a knowledge based test are simply impossible to do without multiple groups of people on two or more sides of an issue screaming (and suing) over the process. Elections could grind to a halt while courts sort through all complaints over every single test question for every single ballot item. snip. Yeah probably not the best example I admit, but I don’t think the majority of people dumb enough to not know the answer are going to be making such esoteric arguments. Additionally, we provide study guides for drivers, there is no reason we could not provide one for a voter’s test that provides verified non partisan information that helps inform voters. Say for example there is a question that asks you to identify the definition of climate change. Your study guide will provide the answer factually, it doesn’t need to say anything about causation or the politics surrounding it. Same for the first question I posted. Most people polled would be able to answer that question accurately without a lot of quibbling. Still, I don’t think that such tests need be exhaustive in detail, nor strictly limited to ballot initiatives etc. Just basic enough to ascertain that the person in front of you understands the broad issues of the day; and that they are able to form a political opinion that is based on verifiable evidence rather than someone’s haircut or some such. Also remember that my proposition did not deprive anyone of a vote. It rewarded informed voters with additional weight. You don’t have to get a card and your vote is still just like anyone’s. Take the time to educate yourself and you receive a bonus. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/139 "2012-07-13T03:11:29Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > And the fact that poll taxes or tests of all kinds have been struck down as unconstitutional pretty much should end that discussion. > [@Weeping\_Wyvern](#): > > Thankfully, both court decisions and the Constitution itself can be changed. The discussion is not over until everyone is satisfied, which will never happen. Thankfully, the Constution was changed to add a [24th Amendment](http://www.usconstitution.net/constamrat.html#Am24), which abolished the Poll Tax. Not so thankfully, it took until 1964 to happen, Mississippi specifically rejected the amendment and nine other states never got around to ratifying it. Let’s all take a minute to review just [how fragile the right to vote can be.](http://www.umich.edu/~lawrace/disenfranchise1.htm) ---
**Author:** ![greenslime1951](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e9bcb4/32.png) [@greenslime1951](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/greenslime1951)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971/140 "2012-07-13T05:48:05Z")
> [@Enkel](#): > > Okay, before you seemed ‘troll-ish’ but now you sound like a flat out troll. You joined Jul 2nd and average 32 posts/day in about 10 days (yup, over 300 posts). This isn’t a discussion, this is just troll bait. If you say so.:rolleyes: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-dont-get-to-vote-unless/627971.md?page=8)