|
|
| What are you willing to do? |
| Something |
|
58% |
[ 7 ] |
| Anything |
|
41% |
[ 5 ] |
| Nothing |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:58 pm
Well, I wasn't saying that we should do that, but it is an interesting concept. And as much as I would like to see a more educated, independent, competent society.... sweatdrop
Quite simply, really smart people still disagree with other really smart people. Which means that being educated doesn't make what you say right. As much as I'd like to think being a more educated society would make things better, I don't see how it changes much. In the end, I think majority rules. It's not perfect, but it works. Which is one reason I think the electoral college should be abolished, since it doesn't necessarilly represent the opinion of the majority.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 8:34 pm
But what if the majority is wrong, Kat? Federalist 51 addresses the concern that a stampeding majority can overrun a more reasoned minority. Or any minority, for that matter. The electoral college was established to ensure that the largely undereducated majority was not permitted to make the grave error of electing an unqualified president. I would argue that this is still necessary, especially in an era dominated by mass media and demagoguery. A couple years ago, I was of the opinion that the Constitution should be amended to eliminate the electoral college and allow presidents to be popularly elected. Unfortunately, I no longer believe that the average person is capable of responsible self-government. They just don't know enough about the way things work to elect a qualified individual. Believe it or not, this has little to do with recent presidential elections. Honestly, it has more to do with learning more about the average voter. Detailed statistical analysis of people who vote is terribly depressing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:49 pm
But the electoral college is also opressing minorities! California has what, 55 electorates? With the winner-take-all system, that is a lot of people whose votes won't count for what they wanted them to. Minorities don't have a chance in this instance.
If the main problem with voters is apathy, or awareness of the issues, maybe the ballots should have a Pole Whore Option. rolleyes
At least until we get education fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2005 1:58 pm
Will we give all of the poll whores ten dollars?
Personally, I'm not too fond of the electoral college system; my state is usually overlooked. But is there any way to make the average person capable of self-government? We can give them all of the information, but we can't make them take any active interest.
West, do you have any links to these analyses or am I better off doing a google?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:20 am
I despise the electoral college... it is like saying, your vote matters... but not really. If we simply placed tighter requirements on citizenship, and voting rights, then the problem of the idiot voter could be dispatched. If American born persons had to take and pass a citizenship test, just like immigrants, that would solve the ignorance of the system problem. I would support a poll test, so long as it was standardized. To register to vote, you must pass this moderately difficult current events and U.S. Law test. ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2005 1:58 pm
Fiddlers Green I despise the electoral college... it is like saying, your vote matters... but not really. If we simply placed tighter requirements on citizenship, and voting rights, then the problem of the idiot voter could be dispatched. If American born persons had to take and pass a citizenship test, just like immigrants, that would solve the ignorance of the system problem. I would support a poll test, so long as it was standardized. To register to vote, you must pass this moderately difficult current events and U.S. Law test. ninja Moderately difficult? That would exlude a lot of people, man. In my AP government class, we took the same literacy test that many blacks were forced to take in the south in order to vote. And that was hard. I know I wouldn't've passed it, and I've had a decent education! I consider myself up to date, but there's a reason those tests were abolished.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:17 pm
*Sips some port*
The important difference is that all citizens would be required to take them to vote. So, no matter your wealth, gender, or pigmentation... if you are ignorant, you don't get a say.
I don't consider it unfair to require a certain level of awareness from the voting populace.
*sips some more*
And if it means fewer idiots get to vote... I'll shed a tear for their ignorance... but not their lack of ability to control the nation, which they have proven unaware of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:51 am
*sets his glass on the end table with a thud*
So, would you support the "separate but equal" doctrine, Fiddler? It seems that what you are proposing would create a class system, differentiating those who can vote from those who can't. Once you do that, you have a group of people who have no say in government - sure, they may be the uneducated and underqualified ones, but their rights are as protected as those of your proposed literate group.
The electoral college exists to represent all of the constituents of it's members. If legislators are only elected by the better educated, how can they claim to represent those who aren't allowed to vote? How can they then possibly make laws regarding them?
No taxation without representation. Be wary that you do not propose an American aristocracy. Even idiots have freedom of speech.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 10:58 am
I do support an American Aristocracy!
*Raise his glass*
It's called citizenship, and I'm sick of it being handed out like candy.
How can we support a doctrine that grants citizenship by accident of birth for free, while we put those who have chosen to make America their home thru an inquisition.
*drains the glass*
You would speak of equality, yet there is now such thing. Not as things stand now, nor ever will there be in the future, your own support for the electoral college shows a distinct lack of trust in the voting populous, and an already prominent attempt to belittle their influence! If the Electoral college was at least proportionate to the actual population sizes, it may be accepted as the will of the people, but let's deal with the truth of the matter, it doesn't.
And even now, look at those in office, do you even remotely believe they represent the people? How many Senators live below the poverty line? How many are women? How many are not caucasin? How many are immigrants? I'm supporting honesty.
Furthermore, we already have the divide you mentioned. I live in an area where it is blatantly clear that not all residents are citizens.
I like that divide.
Let those who wish to participate, earn those rights, not inherit them.
As for Taxation without Representation... Did you ever pay taxes on anything, before you turned 18? Tourists pay taxes. Immigrants pay taxes. Children pay taxes. Felons pay taxes. Any number of the disenfranchised pay taxes.
I want to change the enfranchising process, so that all people, regardless of the soil they were born on, have the same chance to become citizens in our egalitarian nation... or do wish to imply that location of birth determines the merit of an individual's contribution to a society?
*pours another glass*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 11:45 am
This is a sad topic, I'm afraid to touch it. I can see both sides of this, and have always been tempted by the idea of a literacy test. Some people don't have a chance at a good education though, and what of them? They could have great potential, but would be cut out without ever being given a chance. Someone can not know how to read and still be very wise, and I think they should have a chance to vote as well. How do you measure wisdom and common sense?
People who cannot read and write have contributed to our country for many years, and have bettered it. Should we exclude them? I don't think so.
If we are to impose a literacy test on our citizens, we need to make sure they get the education that is due to them. If they have to study and have less time for work, they should be payed for time spent studying. It will benifit the country in the long run, the government can pay to educate the people it is beholden to. I think it had been negligent of late, and needs to step up to take better care of of those who come seeking safety.
If, being offered an education, some people choose not to take it, then I feel no sadness in not letting them vote. I say they must be given a chance, and by they I mean anyone and everyone who wants to learn.
(That live in the states, anyhow. Otherwise we'd have lots of random citizens from other countries voting from overseas for us. Which might not be so bad at times. Nevermind.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 11:59 am
I should clarify that I also vehemently desire federalization of curriculms for compulsory education, rather than allowing the whims of the local scholl boards to wreck the education of our children.
Even if it does cause some discomfort... at least everyone will be held to the same standards...
Further, I should clarify that the core of the poll test or citizenship test, would be completely covered during the compulsory education.
*leans back, and eats some chocolates*
Sorry for getting beligerent there... sweatdrop
*concilatorily pushes the bowl of chocolates towards Weston*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 12:14 pm
::Steals a piece of chocolate. mmm::
That makes it better, then. Nothing would ever be perfect, which is frustrating, but that's pretty fair. Especially if they cover all of the material, that is much better than what used to happen. There is less freedom in curriculum this way, but it makes sure everyone is on the same page. Further education, or advanced education would still be available and optional, I assume? Holding back the more intellegent people is not good for anyone involved.
What would happen to those who do not pass the test, then? Is voting the only right they lose? Do they still get all of the other benifits of the system? So voting would be more of a duty to the community than it is now? I hope they stress that in class. It's more about the community than the individual. I suppose that's all opinion, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 12:52 pm
Honestly, I would like to see the whole citizenship package require a test.
Just like we give immigrants.
Now, this test may be retaken every year I'd say... and there are certain rights that don't matter whether you are a citizen or not... however, participation in governance, and certain licenses would be easier for the citizen to acquire, than the resident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:38 pm
Fiddlers Green As for Taxation without Representation... Did you ever pay taxes on anything, before you turned 18? Tourists pay taxes. Immigrants pay taxes. Children pay taxes. Felons pay taxes. Any number of the disenfranchised pay taxes. Not only do I pay taxes, a significant portion of my paycheck goes to Social Security. Unless I'm somehow gaurunteed retirement benefits, I feel like I'm being cheated. It's my money. The state is taking a portion of my paycheck, and spending it on God knows what. I do not have a say in it. I work at a public library. The government is funding my salary. But they're also using it for things I probably don't want it to be used for. I have an IRA. I've bought stock. I may still be a minor, but I am invested in this economy, dammit. The government is screwing with my money and my future. I'm not represented at all. I feel that this is unjust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2005 2:21 pm
Katane... have you considered joining the Libertarian party? ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
