No.
I trust stupid people to vote more than I trust special interests to determine the criteria.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

even stupid people have interests.

even stupid people have interests. but stupid people generally don't look at the larger picture.

Neither do most smart people when it comes down to it.
Haven't you seen the studies on how partisanship works on the emotional level?
How politics in general is emotional?
How people rationalize and legitimize selfish actions to feel good about them?

These characteristics are not found only in the stupid.
And I do not want humans (who likely have these characteristics as well as other biases) to define "stupid" in a legal sense.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

perhaps, but you can make smart people think about why they are of that opinion. They can make a compelling case. Most stupid people don't even go that far.

stupid is already defined in a legal sense. In fact, the really stupid people cannot even be prosecuted, it's just a very low standard of stupidity.

I believe that in order to be a registered voter, you should have demostrated a minimum working knowledge of how our government operates.

In order to avoid any repeat of the voting tests that were popular here in the South during the last century, I'd suggest that the same test given to foreigners wishing to become United States citizens be given to anyone wishing to become a registered voter.

Also, anyone who is a registered voter should be given special treatment and incentives for voting - perhaps a $1000 tax credit, the day off with pay, or maybe an express lane at the DMV or tax assessors office for registered voters - some sort of government incentive/comp program like what a casino has for it's customers.

Make sure that people know as much about their government as they do about "American Idol" contestants, and reward them for taking an active part in the political process.

__________________
"Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others." - Groucho Marx

I could be completely facetious and suggest that we require a doctorate. Then, we can argue about what discipline the PhD should be. perhaps only allow those with a PhD in poli-sci ?

Back to reality. I can't even argue this because I'm sure the OP was just having a little fun creating the thread to see what responses would be made.


cheers

noone says you ahve to have a phd in poli science (which imho doesn't say much at all)

but some education is actually a prerequisite. It's even a prerequisite at the moment, although it is implicit.

I don't believe an academic degree is the way to go regarding the right to vote. I know more than a few people who are educated beyond their intelligence. We all know a few highly educated people who are dumber than a bag of hammers. Education is the key but education in America has become something of a rubber stamp. If we can provide excellent quality education the rest will fall in line. IMHO critical thinking skills are of paramount importance. The ability to reason deductively is sadly lacking among Americans today. We are full tilt into the Age of Information and it is an unfortunate fact that a large percentage of Americans are victims of it rather than beneficiaries. I fault the education system.

I have many close friends who are university professors in varied disciplines. They continue to say that college students aren't prepared to learn deductively. Students now seem to utter the same mantra - "Just tell us what you want us to know." They do not want to read. They don't want to study and perhaps the worst of all, they do not want to discover facts for themselves.

That is what it is at the university level today. Below that it's even worse.

From time to time I interview people with master's degrees or higher for employment. I am no longer surprised by their lack of grammatical skills or lack of common sense. I won't hire anyone who can't think independently or can't write his/her way out of a wet paper bag.

__________________
You, you, and you, panic. The rest of you follow me.

Last book read: "The Gate House" ~ NelsonDeMille
Now reading: "Nam-A-Rama" ~ Phillip Jennings

Actually i know none, and i'm multidisciplinary. But i'm not an American. Anyway, to make the discussion complete. The ratio of dumb people on a academic level are drasticly lower then when one takes the ratio of dumb people without a academic degree.

You will never be able to make a watertight criterea, but you can make a good one though.


here i totally agree. That's why i proposed the bachelor in science, not arts or law (although the later can also be chosen come to think of it).

The ability to reason deductively is sadly lacking among Americans today. We are full tilt into the Age of Information and it is an unfortunate fact that a large percentage of Americans are victims of it rather than beneficiaries. I fault the education system.[/quote]

hmm seems very grim indeed

well, what i noticed is that although it is true what you say, the level between university and te rest of the population is staggering. You cannot believe how stupid people are. Because you are in a university environment, and everyone is smart, you tend to want more and tend to think that the standard is low while the opposite is true.

But i cant really believe that universities don't learn you the critical thinking skills. It's been hammered into me, even when you are comparing different disciplines, i cannot believe this wouldn't be the same in the US.


well... i never been great at grammar, spelling or style, but it's staggering that i'm nearly always the second corrector at the places I worked. (not now though, which is a relieve).

And as for critical thinking... companies don't like that i noticed. There are very few companies that actually do want that trait, but they are a rarity.