Skip to main content

Responsible Voter Experiments

Responsible Voter Experiments
by Howard Levine
May 15, 2003

One factor more than any that encourages irresponsible government is letting people vote without having to do anything to prove that they are responsible citizens who have a stake in the future of the community. The only significant requirement for a citizen to vote is being at least 18 years old. People who have not demonstrated any sense of responsibility in their lives are not likely to make the best civic minded voters with a long-term view.

There are some constitutional issues regarding restricting voting rights. States cannot restrict voting based on age (if 18 or older), race, sex, or payment of taxes. The only restrictions that are constitutionally legitimate without any affect on a state's seats in the House of Representatives is preventing felons from voting. Any other restrictions may be constitutional, but would result in the state having its population reduced by the number of voters who were made ineligible to vote for purposes of determining representation in the House of Representatives.

Of course, states with only 3 electoral votes have nothing to lose! They are fertile ground for experiments with restricting voting to people who demonstrate their responsibility and/or ability for being concerned with the long-term health of their community.

Here are some interesting ideas that could be tried without violating the US Constitution.

Only allow owners of real estate to vote. People who own property in a community clearly have a long-term interest in the health of that community. Their wealth is tied to the health of the community because they cannot move real estate to another location. People who do not own real estate (renters and dependents), would not be allowed to vote because they do not have their wealth tied to where they live.

Perhaps only allowing people who have successfully served 2 years of active military service or 6 years actively participating in the Military Reserve or National Guard to vote would be interesting. All of these people have demonstrated that they are willing to put their lives on the line in defense of the country. Even though most will not face any serious risks during their military service, they have no way of knowing that in advance. By volunteering and serving successfully, they have demonstated a solid commitment to their country. People who have not served in the military may be very decent people, but they will not have proven their commitment as military veterans will have.

Requiring voters to pass a test on the US Constitution and their state constitution would ensure that voters actually understand how the government is supposed to work. This test would not have to be terribly difficult; it could be administered like the written portion of drivers license exams. The purpose would be to ensure a basic working knowledge of government just as driver tests only ensure basic knowledge of traffic laws. If you are either unwilling or unable to grasp the very basics of how the government is supposed to work, why should you be voting for people to run that government?

The last idea is to allow only married couples who have a child that they either conceived or adopted together to vote. After the last of their children have lived as their children for 18 years (this covers adopted children so we avoid a cottage industry of 17 year olds being "adopted" just to qualify the adopting parents to vote a year later), they retain their right to vote for the rest of their lives as long as they stay married. If the marriage ends because of death, the widow or widower will retain voting rights as if the marriage continued. This gives people with the most important stake in the future, their children, the right to vote. In addition, the couple must prove their loyalty, worthiness, and good judgment by staying married. These voters will, on average, be very responsible compared to the general population because they are having at least one child in a responsible way and are demonstrating a commitment to family values that are likely to produce a reasonably well raised next generation.

Of course, some combination of these qualifications could be used.

It would be interesting to see how states with 3 electoral votes would change if they adopted any of these rules. Perhaps states with more than 3 electoral votes would find the benefits high enough to adopt some of these rules even at the cost of House of Representative seats.

Popular posts from this blog

Trump Re-election Accountability Project: List of Legislators Who Can Vote for Trump Electors

These Republican legislators in Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia hold the power to push the Trump/Pence ticket over the top. These states have Republican majorities in both houses of their legislatures. Their election procedures and integrity of their elections are in question. It appears that substantial Democrat corruption has provided enough illegal votes or suppressed enough Trump votes to give the appearance of a Biden victory. Legislatures have the power to choose the electors and should do so in these cases. If courts require evidence that was destroyed by the Democrats in order to correct the results, they might not act. Legislatures do not need that standard of evidence. Even if they just think there was corruption based on their experience as legislators and citizens, they are empowered to act. This is a safeguard against clever criminals who cover their tracks well. It will require almost all of the Republican legislators in these states to convene the...

It’s War – Republicans Need to Fight

No objective observer can believe that the presidential election was conducted honestly or with integrity in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, or Nevada. This included late changes in election procedures, counting late votes, and counting harvested and other illegal votes. In many cases, Republican poll watchers were prevented from observing the vote counting process which, alone, sufficiently taints the integrity of the election process enough to invalidate the results. The vote results in these states should be challenged. Democrats and their allies in the main stream media and big tech are claiming Biden won even though the recounts and court challenges have not fully resolved the election. They prevented Republicans from making victory claims about Trump through their censorship, and even announced in advance that they would block premature claims of victory. Of course, their censorship only applies to Trump and his supporters. Some court challenges may be successful, ...

CPS Reform Proposal

CPS Reform Proposal Purpose: Improvement in accountability and cost effectiveness of CPS for the benefit of the public is the primary goal of this proposal. It seeks to allow this by privatizing the management of the CPS functions and allowing direct voter input for selecting the amount of services that will be provided by each contracting organization. By requiring voters to vote for percentages of business to go to each contractor, better contractor performance will result in more state business going to the superior contractors. By requiring each voter to vote for at least two contractors, we still ensure that other contractors will be in place to provide cost and quality competition. Time Frames: CPS will contract all routine case management work to 3-5 qualified independent organizations on a bi-annual basis corresponding to the election cycle for state legislators. Investigation work will also be contracted out to 3-5 qualified independent organizations on a bi-annual basis. ...