26 October 2016


by Andy Weddington
Wednesday, 26 October 2016

Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government. Thomas Jefferson

Well, today's short comment ought to excite some folks.

Primarily for the safety of society-at-large, too of the individual, law enforcement administers field sobriety tests, breathalyzers, and blood tests to determine the sobriety, or not, of drivers.

Primarily for the safety of society-at-large, too of the individual, some outfits administer urinalysis to determine the sobriety, or not, of employees (e.g., all military).

So, primarily for the safety of society-at-large, too of the individual, why do we not have "testing" to determine the "sobriety," or not, of citizens who vote?

Bewildered daily by clueless citizens - by the way, this is a non-partisan matter - something must be done to sober the vote.

A proposal ...

Perhaps voters, at the polling station, must first pass (whatever is determined acceptable) a test of current events questions germane to the election - thereby proving knowledgeable enough to not do harm to society-at-large, nor to themselves.

There are countless methodologies but such not for exploration here. 

In previous commentary, I've addressed responsible voting by laying out a tier approach. That is, at age 18 voting at local community, town, city level only. Age 21 add state elections. And at age 26 include national elections. With that track, maturity and experience complement to better ensure a sober (informed) vote.

But that approach falls short of ensuring "sober" voters. Thus, a test of sorts. 

For society-at-large, the vote is our only means to provide good government yet is our greatest threat to safety and survival. 

Field sobriety tests, breathalyzers, blood alcohol tests, urinalysis, etc., do not catch all drunks.

But that the screening tools exist, with possibility (and of harsh consequences) of being subject to, contributes to a more sober society.  

Time for the people to take voting seriously, as implied in Thomas Jefferson's opening thought.

Otherwise, government will not be ours.

And we'll be toast!  

No comments: