SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Daily Northwestern reports
The Illinois Senate voted 38-18 on [November 16] to override Gov. Bruce Rauner's veto of an automatic voter registration bill.
The bill [...] would automatically register voters who are seeking a new or updated license, or who are seeking other services from state departments such as Human Services or Healthcare and Family Services.
[...]The only two things a citizen should need to vote is being 18 years old and a citizen.
[...]The bill received bipartisan support when it passed through the House by a vote of 86-30 and the Senate with a vote of 42-16.
[...]To fully override Rauner's veto, the Illinois House will also have to vote to override, but it will not back in session until Nov. 29.
More information on Automatic Voter Registration can be found here.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday November 20 2016, @04:50PM
It would be better if it were much more tedious to register to vote. It ought to be a privilege earned by passing a test of IQ and knowledge of economics.
The problem with such proposals is that they ignore history and what will inevitably happen if you put such restrictions into effect. You ever heard of "grandfathering" someone or something into a program (or whatever)? It used to be a thing. [wikipedia.org]
After the Civil War, this was a method used to suppress black votes, Hispanic votes, and even (more liberal) lower-class white voters. Basically, many southern states had "literacy tests" which actually were made essentially impossible to pass. (Or at least "impossible to pass" if they were administered to someone who shouldn't be allowed to vote.) But, if your grandfather was an eligible voter (i.e., a landowner in the ante bellum South), then you didn't need to prove your "literacy" and thus were "grandfathered in" to your right to vote.
Now, I'm sure you might say -- this won't happen today. That was obvious racism or whatever. But it wasn't just racism. It was classism. It was manipulation of voting rights based on what one party (Democrats, at that time) wanted, and against their political opponents.
Any "IQ test" or "knowledge of economics" test will eventually be manipulated by political parties to try to favor their base.
We can have legitimate arguments about whether democracy is ultimately a sustainable governmental system, or whether there should be various restrictions on voting rights. But given how deeply major parties tend to go to manipulate election results nowadays, I really don't think we want to put a "voter test" in their hands.