IPod Democracy? Let's hope not...

Over at National Review Online, Jonah Goldberg has an excellent column this weekend on the left's never-ending quest to get more people to vote.

I think he makes a valid point toward the end, but I would take a different tact.

He is right when he says our right to vote is too cheap.  That is incredbile statement, given the numbers of people who died for that right.  And it is a shame.

But I don't think his concept of a civil literacy test will fly.  While it is totally unrelated, there are those who see in it the reflect of the old Jim Crow poll taxes and tests.  This, of course, is an emotional reaction.  Jonah's argument is actually a fair one:  that to be involved in the public life of the Republic, one should demonstrate knowledge and capability.

The problem is that voting is a right, not a privilege.  And while you can establish testing and qualifications for a privilege (think:  driver's licenses,  professional licensing, zoning permits, building permits)  you cannot do so for a right.

So I take a different tact.  My carrot and stick are placed in different places.  I say that if you do not vote, you cannot experience the benefits and privileges of citizenship.  For example, I would argue that if you fail to vote you cannot:

Obtain a driver's license
Get a tax refund
Receive government benefits (Social Security, Medicaid, etc)
Register your children for school
Register a firearm
Title a vehicle
Purchase a home/file a deed
Register a trademark
Register a copyright
File a lawsuit
Apply or old a government job
Enlist in the US Armed Forces
Create a business
Obtain a passport

and so on...

My argument flows from the notion that it is the responsibility of every citizen to vote in every election and to participate fully in the public life of the Republic.  This is the nexus of republican democracy.  If citizens are not willing to do this minor act, then they should not benefit from the fruit of their inaction.

Note that I do not suspend any rights in my list.  I only address the benefits and privileges, and that list is probably not complete.  I want to turn the lefty-progressive arguments on their head, and not make voting required.  I want to make the benefits dependent on voting.

Ultimately, the question we should really be asking ourselves, is that if we are raising generations of young adults who do not feel compelled to vote-- why are we spending so much money on public education?

(I pause as everyone's head whips around and they get that "What is he talking about it?" look on their face)

I attended public schools in two counties: Baltimore County and Wicomico County.  Two very different counties.  But in both, I was imbued with the notion that voting was to be a cherished right and an obligation.  I even had a science teacher a Loch Raven Middle School named Jim Evans -- 8th Grade Earth Science -- who made the argument that science was important to study in school because one day, we would be asked to vote for politicians who would make decisions on how to spend money on science.  Things like the space program, beach restoration (yes, I learned about longshore transport and beach erosion in 8th grade.  Of course I learned it twice, since I moved halfway through the year. Once in Jim Evans' class, and again in Mr. Desjardin's  class at Wi-Middle), and so on.

Mr. Evans made the point that it would be important for us to understand these things when we decided to vote for people that would be spending our tax money.

And he wasn't the only teacher that made this point.

That should be the goal of public education:  to create great citizens who cherish the obligation and the right, and exercise it forcefully and righteously for their own benefit and the health of the Republic.

Until we get back to that, this whole voter participation thing might just be mute.