Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Modern Civics
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 106 of 236 (647691)
01-10-2012 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by NoNukes
01-10-2012 6:05 PM


Re: Jos the Well-Informed Voter
Why make a quiz out of the information?
I was actually pondering this very question today. It might fit my desire to simply have the information easily available at all voting places. That way, anyone who wants to know can easily do so.
The thing is, I'm still kind of leaning toward the reading or viewing of the information being mandatory. Far too many people thnk they know what a candidate's positions are, or what a resolution means, but find out later they were wrong.
And then, if it's mandatory, how do we make sure people are in fact reading the stuff? It could be as simple as putting it on a computer and tracking that someone reads to the bottom, but how many user agreement licenses that require a person to scroll down to the bottom before acceptance really get read?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by NoNukes, posted 01-10-2012 6:05 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by NoNukes, posted 01-11-2012 12:27 PM Perdition has replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 107 of 236 (647735)
01-11-2012 3:55 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Artemis Entreri
01-10-2012 1:21 PM


Artemis Entreri writes:
caffeine writes:
The problem with some sort of voting test is that it opens up the possibility, however small, of being abused to prevent people from exercising their vote. We know, from bitter experience, that given the opportunity, people will attempt to disenfranchise those whom they expect to disagree with them.
I am not aware of the situation in the Czech Republic, what happened with voting there?
I wasn't actually thinking about the Czech Republic, I meant 'we' as in 'humanity', thinking specifically about attempts to disenfranchise blacks in the US and Catholics in Ireland. There's only been democracy here for 20 years, and there's never been any sort of voting test, but if you want a local example of the weaselly attempts people try and use to disenfranchise those they dislike, look no further than the 1993 citizenship law.
When Czechoslovakia split in two, the citizenship law was designed in such a way as to deny citizenship to many long-term residents of the country whose administrative address was technically in the Slovak half. Imagine being born in Texas, moving to New York as a child, then being denied US citizenship 30 years later because Texas seceded (or, in some cases, the same thing happening because your parents were Texan, even though you're New York born-and-bred). The people affected by this were disproportionately Roma and, lest anyone have any doubt that they were intentionally targeted as such, the was later amended to extend citizenship to some non-Roma accientally caught by the provisions.
In fairness though, I think trying to force them to leave the country was higher in the minds of legislators than stopping them from voting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Artemis Entreri, posted 01-10-2012 1:21 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by frako, posted 01-11-2012 5:08 AM caffeine has not replied
 Message 112 by Artemis Entreri, posted 01-11-2012 1:22 PM caffeine has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 108 of 236 (647746)
01-11-2012 5:08 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by caffeine
01-11-2012 3:55 AM


We have a similar problem though not so much the governments fault.
When Slovenia got its independence from Yugoslavia, those borne in slovenia automatically got citizenship and other papers those who where not got numerous invitations to the county to get their papers in order. Thing is allot of people speculated that Slovenia would sooner or later be overrun by Serbia so they dint get their papers in order. After a while they found out they where "deleted" now they are trying to sue the government for deleting them, calling themselves the deleted ones. But technically they where not deleted their records where just not transferred to the new books because they dint go to the county to get their papers in order. S now 20 years later each individual case has to be rewived again, to see if actually any wrong was done to any of them.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by caffeine, posted 01-11-2012 3:55 AM caffeine has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 109 of 236 (647817)
01-11-2012 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by Perdition
01-10-2012 6:19 PM


Re: Jos the Well-Informed Voter
The thing is, I'm still kind of leaning toward the reading or viewing of the information being mandatory. Far too many people thnk they know what a candidate's positions are, or what a resolution means, but find out later they were wrong.
And what do we do with people who get a zero on the quiz?
If we are back to talking about candidate positions, I might well believe that candidate X is lying sob and that despite his claims to the contrary, he is going to send the National Guard to my house to collect my guns and melt them down to make a statue of General Grant. But in order to pass your quiz, I have to check off your box saying that candidate X is against gun control. Well I ain't falling for your jack booted mind control. .

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Perdition, posted 01-10-2012 6:19 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Perdition, posted 01-11-2012 12:57 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 110 of 236 (647823)
01-11-2012 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by NoNukes
01-11-2012 12:27 PM


Re: Jos the Well-Informed Voter
And what do we do with people who get a zero on the quiz?
Give them the answers and let them try again.
But in order to pass your quiz, I have to check off your box saying that candidate X is against gun control. Well I ain't falling for your jack booted mind control.
Yep, and then you can go and vote based on your conviction that the person is lying. All we can do is make it so that people know what a candidate has proposed and said, what the voter and the candidate do after that is entirely up to each of them.
In the case of the candidate, however, we would then have a record of his/her promises and stances. If they deviate, we'll be able to ask them about it and have them explain it for the next election. If nothing else, it gives a bit more accountability to the candidates.
For example, Romney has been shown saying one thing to one crowd and another to a different crowd. He says whatever he wants to win over the people in front of him. If he had to write down an answer to a questionaire that would then be read by every voter in the country, he couldn't get away with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by NoNukes, posted 01-11-2012 12:27 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by NoNukes, posted 01-11-2012 4:03 PM Perdition has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4228 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 111 of 236 (647828)
01-11-2012 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Perdition
01-10-2012 2:09 PM


perdition writes:
So, why would you want to limit the number of people who have rights in this country? Or would citizens just have different rights from residents, and what would those rights be?
DISCLAIMER:
My position has been purely hypothetical. It was a response to the OP when the OP asked Do any of you have any suggestions as to how we could reintroduce this discipline to an apathetic public?
Is there anything else that you feel should be part of a mandatory education in preparation for becoming a U.S. Citizen?
I just came up with this on the fly as a possible idea to the OP in an attempt to generate discussion. I was just participating in the thread, I am just answering the questions, and playing along. These are not necessarily my own personal thoughts on this issue, as much as it is a stance that I am taking for this thread. Usually Dr. Adequate or someone jumps in and asks questions to me that make me realize it is a bad idea, or reach some other good conclusion about the idea, while the low-brow posters strawman me and call me names (such is life here @ EvC).
To answer your question that I quoted above:
I was not interested in reducing rights, as much as creating a catalyst for people to be more engaged and have some stakes in having knowledge in civics. The dilemma is that naturalized citizens tend to have more knowledge and understanding on the government process than birthright citizens, and what could be done to either get people interested in civics, or could there be incentives to reintroduce civics to an apathetic public. This was my idea for the dilemma. I went with voting and hold public office, and possibly a tax break for those who pass the test, of course the residents who do not pass the test would be afforded the protective rights granted to everyone. I am not saying it is the best idea, I am just giving an answer to the OP
I am involved in my community. The problem is that say IO want to run for school baord. I gather signatures, and I'm on the ballot. Now, how does anyone know to vote for me over the other guy? Purely based on party affiliation? Most of our local positions are either run unopposed, in whcih case I don't vote for them, I write my name in, or there are two people, one from each party. There are no debates, and unless the newspaper takes the time to send them a voluntary questionaire and they take the time to fill it in and send it back, there is literally no way to know what anyone stands for.
I would suggest spending some campaign money and writing articles for the local newspaper. To get the word out. Possibly even advertising on the cities website. Maybe rent a billboard and advertise your self as well as a webpage where you focus on the local issues important to you that you are running for. In addition you can visit and campaign at the local clubs (VFW, Moose Lodge, K of C, etc.).
Continued apathy and going with the flow will not solve anything, nor allow you to make a name for yourself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Perdition, posted 01-10-2012 2:09 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Perdition, posted 01-11-2012 2:19 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4228 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 112 of 236 (647830)
01-11-2012 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by caffeine
01-11-2012 3:55 AM


caffeine writes:
I wasn't actually thinking about the Czech Republic, I meant 'we' as in 'humanity', thinking specifically about attempts to disenfranchise blacks in the US and Catholics in Ireland. There's only been democracy here for 20 years, and there's never been any sort of voting test, but if you want a local example of the weaselly attempts people try and use to disenfranchise those they dislike, look no further than the 1993 citizenship law.
Ahh Jim Crow in the USA. That is a State by State issue as you register to vote in the state in which you reside. That was not a federal thing.
Imagine being born in Texas, moving to New York as a child, then being denied US citizenship 30 years later because Texas seceded (or, in some cases, the same thing happening because your parents were Texan, even though you're New York born-and-bred).
Yes this happened to blacks and natives, as well. I don’t really know much about the Roma. It is odd that they are not excepted in a continent that is pretty well mixed anyway. They must really be outsiders, or have a different religion, or not be white-ish.
Ok so they have to serve in the military instead of passing a vote test. To goal in this thread is to get people into civics, and know it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by caffeine, posted 01-11-2012 3:55 AM caffeine has not replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 113 of 236 (647834)
01-11-2012 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Artemis Entreri
01-11-2012 1:10 PM


I just came up with this on the fly as a possible idea to the OP in an attempt to generate discussion.
Understood.
I would suggest spending some campaign money and writing articles for the local newspaper. To get the word out. Possibly even advertising on the cities website. Maybe rent a billboard and advertise your self as well as a webpage where you focus on the local issues important to you that you are running for. In addition you can visit and campaign at the local clubs (VFW, Moose Lodge, K of C, etc.).
You're right. I could do those things, and get my message out...assuming I have the money to do so. Running for school board, I'm basically stuck with whatever cash I have in my bank account, and assuming I want to keep my house, my car, and my health, I really don't have any extra to spend on billboards and such.
But that still doesn't address the fact that as a voter, rather than a candidate, unless they do those things, and I am made aware of a meeting, there is no way for me to learn about a candidate's positions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Artemis Entreri, posted 01-11-2012 1:10 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Artemis Entreri, posted 01-11-2012 4:42 PM Perdition has replied
 Message 120 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-11-2012 5:03 PM Perdition has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 114 of 236 (647854)
01-11-2012 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Perdition
01-11-2012 12:57 PM


Re: Jos the Well-Informed Voter
Yep, and then you can go and vote based on your conviction that the person is lying. All we can do is make it so that people know what a candidate has proposed and said, what the voter and the candidate do after that is entirely up to each of them.
But I don't care what the person has said. Why do I need to read your propaganda regarding what you think I need to know in order to exercise my right to vote. I want my country back and my weapons cache, I mean gun collection intact, and that's what determines how I'm going to vote.
My point is that even a completely objective reporting of what a candidate has said can be misleading because you are not going to provide a complete, in context report of everything the candidate said. You would not be satisfied with a report that did not include your governor's union busting positions, but you might leave out his position on puppy farms.
In a recent national election in VA, a candidate lost a good chunk of his support as a result of making the following statement regarding an Indian American student filming his event:
quote:
This fellow here over here with the yellow shirt, Macaca, or whatever his name is. He's with my opponent... Lets give a welcome to Macaca, here. Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia.
Do you think that statement or any of its implications would have or should have appeared on your quiz?

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Perdition, posted 01-11-2012 12:57 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Perdition, posted 01-11-2012 4:23 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 115 of 236 (647857)
01-11-2012 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by NoNukes
01-11-2012 4:03 PM


Re: Jos the Well-Informed Voter
But I don't care what the person has said. Why do I need to read your propaganda regarding what you think I need to know in order to exercise my right to vote. I want my country back and my weapons cache, I mean gun collection intact, and that's what determines how I'm going to vote.
It would be one more requirement for voting, much like providing proof of residency. It doesn't need to affect how you vote at all. As I've said, I don't mean to remove stupid votes, only uninformed votes.
My point is that even a completely objective reporting of what a candidate has said can be misleading because you are not going to provide a complete, in context report of everything the candidate said. You would not be satisfied with a report that did not include your governor's union busting positions, but you might leave out his position on puppy farms.
I fully realize that not every possible issue could be covered. What I would include on the quiz would be the top 3-5 issues concerning the voters in this election, as revealed by an average of any polls (possibly excluding outliers) conducted within the affected region. For a national election, this would obviously be the entire country, and polls of this sort are already carried out ad nauseam.
Do you think that statement or any of its implications would have or should have appeared on your quiz?
If this issue became one of the top five issues in the nation, sure. But, obviously, this quiz would not take the place of current national media, indeed, if the current national media were better at its job, this would not even be an issue for me.
In my scenario, the "Macaca" comment would still have been reported in the media as it was. When voters appeared at their voting places, they would have already seen (or not) this issue and vote accordingly. The quiz would only allow them to see their candidate's positions on the issues that (statistically) they care about most.
If I recall correctly, the "Macaca" comment ultimately led to the candidate dropping form the race. Or, at the very least, he was not the one on the final ballot, so the whole issue is moot as far as my scenario is concerned.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by NoNukes, posted 01-11-2012 4:03 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by NoNukes, posted 01-11-2012 4:53 PM Perdition has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4228 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 116 of 236 (647866)
01-11-2012 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Perdition
01-11-2012 2:19 PM


perdition writes:
You're right. I could do those things, and get my message out...assuming I have the money to do so. Running for school board, I'm basically stuck with whatever cash I have in my bank account, and assuming I want to keep my house, my car, and my health, I really don't have any extra to spend on billboards and such.
and most people don't; that is why they join political parties. so they can get funding to print signs, and pamphlets, and have like minded people help them by going door to door, and handing out information. though when you sell out to a party sometimes you have to vote the way that party wants you to vote, and at that moment you become a POLITICIAN.
perdition writes:
But that still doesn't address the fact that as a voter, rather than a candidate, unless they do those things, and I am made aware of a meeting, there is no way for me to learn about a candidate's positions.
then I wouldn't vote for them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Perdition, posted 01-11-2012 2:19 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Perdition, posted 01-11-2012 4:52 PM Artemis Entreri has seen this message but not replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 117 of 236 (647869)
01-11-2012 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Artemis Entreri
01-11-2012 4:42 PM


and most people don't; that is why they join political parties. so they can get funding to print signs, and pamphlets, and have like minded people help them by going door to door, and handing out information. though when you sell out to a party sometimes you have to vote the way that party wants you to vote, and at that moment you become a POLITICIAN.
Pretty much all of our local elections have two people running, one a Republican and one a Democrat. In some instances, we have someone running unopposed, but they are still, almost always, identified as R or D.
But, if you're running for school board, unless the election has been given national scope, like maybe in Dover after the ID court case, or some place like that, the national party won't give you any money, only a local chapter will, and all they can give you is what they can raise, and what they can raise is directly related to how important people think the race is. School board races in this area rarely make any waves at all.
then I wouldn't vote for them.
That's a very solid answer. However, most people will vote for every race on the ballot, and in the absence of any information, usually go with party affiliation. If that doesn't work, they go for anything else that can be deciphered by the candidate's names. I know one person who, if he knows nothing else about the candidates, votes for the person with either a female or minority name.
Requiring all candidates to answer a questionaire, and making every voter at least glance at it would give people more reason to vote for someone than the above.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Artemis Entreri, posted 01-11-2012 4:42 PM Artemis Entreri has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 118 of 236 (647870)
01-11-2012 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Perdition
01-11-2012 4:23 PM


Re: Jos the Well-Informed Voter
In my scenario, the "Macaca" comment would still have been reported in the media as it was. When voters appeared at their voting places, they would have already seen (or not) this issue and vote accordingly. The quiz would only allow them to see their candidate's positions on the issues that (statistically) they care about most.
I find this argument completely baffling. Isn't every other position on the quiz going to be based on the candidates' public statements? I might still vote for a candidate who made that remark if it were properly addressed by the candidate or if it were clearly out of character for the candidate. So how much stuff goes on the quiz?
If I recall correctly, the "Macaca" comment ultimately led to the candidate dropping form the race. Or, at the very least, he was not the one on the final ballot, so the whole issue is moot as far as my scenario is concerned.
I don't believe you've raised a legitimate objection. What if the comment had instead been made during the race for the general election? If you need a different hypothetical, imagine a different comment made during the campaign for general election, and later disavowed by the candidate. Who gets to decide whether the comment and or the disavowal gets put on the quiz or not?

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Perdition, posted 01-11-2012 4:23 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Perdition, posted 01-11-2012 4:58 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 119 of 236 (647873)
01-11-2012 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by NoNukes
01-11-2012 4:53 PM


Re: Jos the Well-Informed Voter
I find this argument completely baffling. Isn't every other position on the quiz going to be based on the candidates' public statements? I might still vote for a candidate who made that remark if it were properly addressed by the candidate or if it were clearly out of character for the candidate. So how much stuff goes on the quiz?
I've explained this before. The quiz comes from one source, a questionaire that all candidates on a ballot are required to fill out in order to be on the ballot. The questions in the questionaire are derived from the 3-5 most important issues as revealed by polls asking for the most important issues in the district in which the candidate is running.
I don't believe you've raised a legitimate objection. What if the comment had instead been made during the race for the general election? If you need a different hypothetical, imagine a different comment made during the campaign for general election, and later disavowed by the candidate. Who gets to decide whether the comment and or the disavowal gets put on the quiz or not?
Seeing as how people can and do lie, especially politicians, the process outlined above is the best I could come up with that would be unbiased. A side-effect of requiring the questionaire to be filled out would mean we would have a record of the candidate's answers. If s/he doesn't conform to the stances or promises layed out, they'll have to answer for that during the next election...or possibly a recall election.
Also, the candidate couldn't pander to different groups. The answers would be the same for the deep south, the northeast and the midwest.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by NoNukes, posted 01-11-2012 4:53 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by NoNukes, posted 01-11-2012 7:03 PM Perdition has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 120 of 236 (647876)
01-11-2012 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Perdition
01-11-2012 2:19 PM


But that still doesn't address the fact that as a voter, rather than a candidate, unless they do those things, and I am made aware of a meeting, there is no way for me to learn about a candidate's positions.
uhh.... ask them???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Perdition, posted 01-11-2012 2:19 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Perdition, posted 01-11-2012 5:10 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024