argument top image

Should there be a test to vote?
Back to question

A voting test ensures people know how politics works

It’s very important to understand how the government works. The government has been rooted in laws and traditions that have been in place for centuries. If someone knew how the government operated, they could appoint people who would best run the country.

The Argument

People should know how government systems works before voting. Government systems are intricate and often difficult to understand. People complain because of this because they don't understand how the systems work. For example, in order for a bill to become a law, it's voted and agreed upon many times before getting to the president and congress.[1] It's a long and strenuous process, especially if the bill isn't agreed upon and has to be revised. If voters knew concepts like this, they would vote for more qualified candidates during an election.

Counter arguments

Tests are an unreliable way of making someone learn. Tests want testers to remember random facts for just a short amount of time. This means no one will remember all the information they learn once the test is over. Plus, tests aren't that important. For example, the SAT and ACT aren't as important as they seem. Colleges and universities do have SAT and ACT scores to see which students are qualified, but that's not all administration looks at.[2] High school GPA, behavior, writing skills, and connections matter more than ACT and SAT scores.[3] Although it’s important to know how the government works, it shouldn’t keep people from voting.



[P1] Tests should reflect that someone knows how the government works. [P2] People who don’t know how the government works shouldn’t vote. [P3] Ignorance would negatively affect the country.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P2] Ignorance shouldn’t be the determining factor of who gets the right to vote. It’s a civilian right.


This page was last edited on Friday, 17 Apr 2020 at 11:28 UTC

Explore related arguments