Voters should be required to take a test before voting
Debate Rounds (3)
Lack of knowledge is the reason why voting is 18 plus, right? Then why people who don't anything about the candidates allowed to vote? Surely there should be test for voting, and the age limit dropped.
https://loc.gov...] , and any sort of test that would infringe on that right would be struck down by the courts just as literacy tests were made illegal. While the intentions of a test before voting is to ensure that voters are well informed on the candidates it ultimately just prevents many from voting, and there for is discriminatory against those who cannot find time to take the test.
It can be a short test so that it takes less time, and the passing percentage can be 20 or 30 percent.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tejretics 4 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro really doesn't have any arguments. Pro gives benefits to reducing the age limit, but has no unique benefits to this "voter test" outside of restating the proposal. Con says implementation of this will fail since it has already been done before, and that it will harm voter turnout. Con also argues that it goes against the principles of democracy. These are dropped. In response to Pro's plan to allow 16-18 year-olds to vote, Con offers a counterplan to allow them to vote without the text- thus taking out all of Pro's unique offense. Vote: Con.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.