Practice Good Theory Blog Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 A citizenship questionnaire: To become a naturalized citizen of the U.S. one must pass a quiz. The questions are all known in advance. The government publishes a list of 100 questions. Applicants are quizzed on about 10, randomly picked. They must get at least 7 right, to pass. The majority of the questions on the quiz are procedural ("Who is the commander in chief of the armed forces?" "If the President can no longer serve, who becomes President?" "What are the colors in our flag?") Check this site for examples. They have recently tried to add some more conceptual notions (see this list). In general, I think a citizenship test is a good idea. I think pre-published questions are a good idea. However, the questions ought to test the applicants understanding of the major principles of government, and nothing else. One danger of a test is that the government could reject people who answer in ways they do not like. So, the correct answer ought to be published as well. [Here, "correct" means: answers that reflect what the constitution says, not what it ought to say.] In fact, if the questions are fundamental enough, the answers should come from a pretty straightforward interpretation of the constitution. Here's an idea: a good constitution would include a simple (say 10 - 20 question) test of its principles. The answers would be in there too. And, the answers would be multiple-choice. The wrong answers (in the multiple-choice) would be useful too. The framers of the constitution could use them to better delineate their ideas. Example: Question: Under our constitution, what is the primary purpose of government? Choose one. a. To ensure that laws are by the people and for the people b. To protect individual rights c. To promote the common welfare d. To encourage or enforce rational behavior of its citizens e. To help people live, work and pursue happiness Given the time I spent on designing the answers, I'm sure they could be much improved. That's not my point here: that is something the framers of a constitution would do as part of writing a constitution. The point is that a set of questions with wrong answers coupled with the right ones could help mark out the key principles of government. There ought to be a question that highlights the primary purpose of government. In addition, there ought to be a question that illustrates that democracy is nowhere near individual rights in underlying moral government. Also, something that shows that rights are not limited to anything enumerated in the constitution, but the other way around: it is the government that is limited to enumerated powers. Such a questionnaire ought to be written so that it is an integral part of the constitution, with courts able to treat it as such. If the questionnaire is objective, principled and integrated into the constitution, I think it should also be made a requirement to vote. Why limit it to naturalized citizens? Why not extend it to people born in the country, and make it a requirement for voting? One would need laws to ensure that this cannot become a way of excluding qualified people from voting. However, the principle is this: understanding the most fundamental ideas of the constitution -- understanding, not agreeing -- ought to be a basic requirement for voting. Blog cross-posted with permission. See link at top of post for original. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.