Politics, News & Issues >
US Elections (Other)
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould voters have to pass a civics test to be able to vote?
Results so far:
| No | 57% | 57 votes | Total: 100 votes | |
| Yes | 43% | 43 votes |
No
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesWhile every bone in my academic body yearns for the day when all Americans will be able to at least identify their own country on a world map, I would be opposed to any obstacles that would preclude even the most blissfully ignorant from voting.
There are several practical reasons that undermine the idea for a national civics test. The first barrier would be the existing statistics which highlight the fact that many of the people who would fail the civics exam are already opting out of the electoral process.
In the 2004 US Presidential election, just 41.3% of eligible adult voters turned out to vote. If you look at a state-by-state analysis, this is a correlation between the states with the lowest amount of educational spending and the states with dismal voter turn out. The relationship is striking compared with the national average:
-US Average spending per pupil ($8,661). Average voter turn-out 2004 (41.3%)
-Utah (50th out of 50) spending per pupil = $5032. Average turn-out 2004 = 35.2%
-Arizona (49th) spending per pupil = $5474. Average turn-out 2004 = 39.5%
-Arkansas (48th) spending per pupil = $6202. Average turn-out 2004 = 37.6%
-Mississippi (47th) spending per pupil = $6452. Average turn-out 2004 = 29.3%
There are several questions we can pose in relation to this evidence. First - how many of the existing voters in these states would avoid registering to vote altogether if the right was tied to a civics test? More significantly...how would the potential decline in voter participation impact the ability of these high-need states to secure better funding for state services, including education?
A second major hindrance that would impede any voting test requirement is our US Constitution. Amendment XIV, Section 1 defines the privileges of citizenship and emphatically states that "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States." The right to vote is the cornerstone of US citizenship, and even the most well-intentioned obstacles to exercising this right would be at odds with our national ideals.
Finally, there is an historical example in the US which should give us all a moment of pause when considering this issue. What would have happened if there had been a voting 'test' in the US after African-Americans were given the right to vote in 1865? Most African-Americans during that era lacked a functional education and many former slaves were completely illiterate.
The fact is, many states did have a variety of literacy laws and administrative roadblocks that were designed to keep African-Americans from exercising their new rights of citizenship. It was only after the National Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965 that literacy tests and other voting exams were abolished.
In 1975 the United States Commission on Civil Rights reported that "The 1965 Voting Rights Act (was) one of the most significant pieces of civil rights legislation ever enacted. Its passage and enforcement have been responsible for substantial increases in the number of blacks registered, voting, and elected to office in the seven Southern States covered by the act." Clearly, any movement to reinstate voter testing would run counterintuitive to the gains made since 1965.
There is certainly a need to increase our overall national intelligence and I think a return to critical thinking is absolutely imperative for the future success of our nation. If we want to get serious about this issue, however, we need to work to improve our educational system...and leave the path to the ballot box alone.
National Education Association (2005) Table 5. 'Current Expenditures ($) per Student in Public K-12 Schools' Sourced on-line 18 Feb 08, available from: http://www.nea.org/e dstats/RankFull06b.h tm
United States Commission on Civil Rights (1975) The Voting Rights Act: Ten Years After.
Sourced on-line 18 Feb 08. Available from: http://www.law.umary land.edu/marshall/us ccr/documents/cr12v9 43a.pdf
US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Voting Section (no date) 'The Voting Rights Act of 1965', sourced on-line 18 Feb 08. Available from: http://www.usdoj.gov /crt/voting/intro/in tro_b.htm
United States Election Project: Voter Statistics (2007) Sourced on-line 18 Feb 08. Available from: http://elections.gmu .edu/Voter_Turnout_2 006.htm
Learn more about this author, Eiregirl.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Yes
Many laws have been written to extend guaranteed suffrage to various groups within our nation. The question arises each election cycle as to whether one group or another is the target of an effort to curtail their right to vote and the courts will usually come down very heavily on the side of universal suffrage.
As long as the potential voters meet age and residency requirements, they are guaranteed the right to express their political preferences. Conventional wisdom holds that open elections are the sign of a truly free society. The question is, can this freedom be carried too far? Can having such open suffrage requirements reach a point of diminishing returns?
Recently, while scanning a popular blog site and reading the contrapuntal postings I came across this gem. In defense of the Iraqi conflict this person wrote, "Does anyone truly believe that Guantanamo was better off when it was being run by Saddam Hussein than it is now?"
This person is probably a registered voter and, given his defense of the Iraq war, possibly a McCain supporter. Which party this person actually supports, however, is not germane. One can find equally inane comments on both sides of the political fence.
The question we must ask is whether there are people in the electorate who are too ill informed to be allowed to vote. In the early days of the nation there were restrictions placed on the right to vote. Over the years these restrictions have been eliminated.
No one could reasonably argue that the right to vote should be curtailed due to ethnicity, race or gender nor should there be a financial test for suffrage. Ignorance and stupidity, however, are different matters.
Ignorance can and should be addressed through education. The rub is that in order to identify ignorance one must test for it and literacy tests, once used to disenfranchise African-American voters in the Deep South, have long since fallen from grace.
Testing is the only method available to identify those suffering from either ignorance or stupidity and we, the people, in the spirit of self-preservation, should examine ways to mandate that it be done.
A possible answer would be to place greater emphasis on standardized civics instruction in high school with a voter's registration card as the reward for successfully completing the course. The same courses could be offered by community colleges or by private educational facilities.
One thing is certain, an increase in the quality of the voters would result in an increase in the quality of the candidates. It is not surprising that political candidates prefer an uninformed electorate. How else could they rely on majority acceptance of the same empty promises, election after election, without ever being called to task?
It is not by way of an informed electorate that the country is facing its current laundry list of problems. What we see today is the result of believing decades of "pie in the sky" promises by political candidates. We, as the electorate, don't seem to realize or to care that the programs being touted either will not or cannot be done.
The few who do take the pains to educate themselves are voices crying in the wilderness as we are collectively swept along on a tide of false hope and misinformation. The only hope for our nation is for the electorate to become astute enough to routinely "fact check" the candidates prior to giving them our votes. Ignorance and stupidity cannot be protected voter's rights.
Learn more about this author, Rick Fontes.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- US Elections (Other)
- Should corporations, unions and trade associations be permitted to write checks directly to politicians and parties?
- Should all US states offer same-day voter registration?
- Should there be limits on contributions to political campaigns by individuals?
- Is it ever too early to run for president?
- Should Election Day be a national holiday?
