You don't get to vote unless:

[zoid]

@greenslime1951

The civil rights movement, civil rights legislation, a massive change in social mores, and the fact that we’ve elected a black president and many other high officials.

The abuses you mention date from decades ago. Nowadays, society won’t stand for that sort of thing. A reversion to the 1920s seems rather unlikely. Or, in the case of the South, to the 1960s. “Being later” is, in fact, quite a significant difference.

Seriously? You honestly think abuse of power is a thing of the past?

[Boyo_Jim]

@greenslime1951

Only that which an eighth-grader would reasonably expected to have. So no, you wouldn’t be expected to know what a bill of attainder or a pocket veto were, but you might have to know which body, the House or the Senate, ranks higher.

You would fail again just by suggesting this is a legitimate question. Neither body ranks “higher”. Each has its its own separate role, and neither can overrule the other. There is a general assumption that the Senate ranks higher because of the term of Senators and some procedural rules like the filibuster, but to say one ranks “higher” is not correct. In fact, you could argue (incorrectly but plausibly) that since the Speaker of the House is the next in line for presidential succession after the Vice President, that the Constitution hold the House in greater esteem than the Senate.

So, back to an earlier question, are you going to test for fact, or the generally understood mythology that is also generally incorrect?

[zoid]

@Boyo_Jim

You would fail again just by suggesting this is a legitimate question. Neither body ranks “higher”. Each has its its own separate role, and neither can overrule the other. There is a general assumption that the Senate ranks higher because of the term of Senators and some procedural rules like the filibuster, but to say one ranks “higher” is not correct. In fact, you could argue (incorrectly but plausibly) that since the Speaker of the House is the next in line for presidential succession after the Vice President, that the Constitution hold the House in greater esteem than the Senate.

So, back to an earlier question, are you going to test for fact, or the generally understood mythology that is also generally incorrect?

You’re not gonna ask him for a cite for his “facts” are you? Because we’ve been down that road and it’s a dead end.

[Enuma_Elish]

To the OP: You can only vote with a valid state-sponsored picture ID. If you cannot reasonably afford such an ID, or are reasonably incapable of getting one for yourself (such as in cases of age or infirmity) , the state is responsible for providing it to you, even to the extent of having someone drive you to the DMV (or applicable agency) at state expense to get your picture ID.

You must be a citizen of a state for at least 6 months before you are eligible to vote in a state election. You must be a US citizen for at least 6 months in order to be eligible for a federal election.

To be allowed to vote, you must show your picture ID and sign the voter rolls. If you do not sign the voter rolls, you are not allowed to vote.

[listedmia]

All the other issues aside, how would you do this without disenfranchising disabled people who are otherwise smart and informed? Like if there’s a written test, obviously vision-impaired people will have a hard time completing it. If you have somebody to read them the questions, then all of a sudden there’s two different tests, and that’s not fair at all. The illiterate guy is over in the corner wondering “Why can’t I get the test read to me like that blind guy?”

If you need to be able to write, then what about people with non-functioning or missing hands?

If you do all the tests out loud, then you are screwing over the deaf people. Sign-language interpreter? You are introducing a language other than English, and also creating two slightly different versions of the test.

Obviously some people currently require reasonable accomodations to understand the ballot, and that’s fine. But if you introduce that into your system, where do you draw the line? Is dyslexic ok, but not plain old slow?

The whole thing seems like unworkable fuckery to me.

[dougie_monty]

I remember posting about this years ago. My high-school government teacher said people should have to take a test on history and government (much as in the OP); besides, he said, they should be property owners. As I recall, I got a particularly violent backlash from the Teeming Millions on this one–much as I expected I would. His philosophy reeks of a caste society.