Drafted over one weekend by two people who were, at the time, arguing about a $14 line item.
Not your mother's name. Not "the family plan." Not your ex's, which you are still on because neither of you wants to make the call. Democracy begins where the autopay ends.
Kyle, you are thirty-four.A single late fee shall void eligibility for one full election cycle. Prorated charges are disqualifying. Partial payments are disqualifying. Paying early is suspicious and shall be reviewed.
There is no appeals process. There is a phone tree.Physically. On request. County clerks shall be empowered to ask "where is it" and to reject any answer containing the phrase "somewhere in the basement, I think."
This plank was added because it was funny, and nobody removed it.Should a citizen cease paying their own bill in later life, eligibility lapses. The reasoning: if you cannot manage a wireless account, you cannot manage a republic. The reasoning is bad. We noticed immediately. We kept it in anyway, because the moment you write it down you can see exactly what it is.
Yes, this plank disenfranchises your grandmother. That is the point of the plank. Keep reading.Verification at the point of ballot issuance. Estimated cost: $2.4 billion annually, plus a call center. Estimated fraud prevented: we did not check. Estimated citizens removed from the rolls: most of them, including us.
Especially us.We founded an institute. It has a logo and one intern.
Abstract. We examine whether the ability to maintain an uninterrupted wireless account predicts sound democratic judgment. It does not. We publish anyway, because the finding is inconvenient and we have already printed the letterhead.
Using a sample of 1,200 respondents recruited entirely from one group chat, we regressed self-reported civic competence against months of continuous service. The relationship was not significant. It was not close to significant. Our lead author described the scatterplot as "a bag of rice."
We note that every eligibility rule ever proposed — literacy tests, property requirements, poll taxes, and now this — arrives with a chart that looks exactly like ours. The chart is never the reason for the rule. The rule comes first. The chart is decoration.
Conclusion. There is no measurable trait that separates people who deserve a vote from people who do not, which is precisely why the vote is not something anyone has to deserve.
If citizenship is going to be billed monthly, it may as well be bundled.
Every hour you wait, another adult on their parents' family plan gets closer to a ballot. We cannot do this without you. We also cannot do this with you. We cannot do this.
Unsolicited, unverified, and in two cases legally disputed.
"I unsubscribed and they added me twice. Then they added my dog. My dog is now a monthly donor and, under §1, more eligible to vote than I am."
— R. Delacroix, verified supporter"Finally, a movement that recognizes what I have been saying at Thanksgiving for eleven years. My family has stopped inviting me. This is what persecution looks like."
— Anonymous, by request of his family"I'm 81. I've voted in fifteen presidential elections, buried a husband, and raised four children who cannot operate a thermostat. My grandson pays my phone bill as a kindness. Under this proposal that kindness costs me my vote. Think about that for one full second."
— Eleanor W., who is winning this argument"I qualified. I read the whole site, I took the quiz, and I qualified. Then I read my results again."
— T. Osei, who did not qualify"As a small business owner, I pay six phone bills. By this logic I should get six votes. I have been asking about this for weeks and nobody will answer me."
— D. Kowalczyk, asking a fair question"You people are going to get quoted out of context on the news and you know it."
— our lawyerAll of them correct.
Yes. Your grandmother. Who raised children through a recession, who has voted in every election since before you were assigned a social security number, and who now has her phone on her son's plan because it saves everyone $30 a month.
Under our proposal she loses her vote over $30 a month. When you say the rule out loud with a real person's name attached to it, the rule falls apart in about four seconds. That is true of every rule like this that has ever been proposed.
It is a poll tax with fewer steps, honestly. A poll tax at least had the decency to be about money openly. Ours pretends to be about maturity, which is how these things are usually sold.
The Twenty-Fourth Amendment exists. We looked it up halfway through building this website and had a quiet moment.
Excellent question, and one that reveals the whole machine. Any test based on paying for a thing is a test of whether you have money. Any test of maturity is a test of who is writing the test.
Every proposal to shrink the electorate arrives dressed as common sense. Ours is wearing a very silly hat so you can see it coming.
No. This is satire. The proposal is deliberately absurd and we do not want a single person removed from the voter rolls — not eighteen-year-olds, not eighty-year-olds, not you.
We are serious about exactly one thing, and it is at the bottom of the page.
It will. Which is why the punchline is baked into every section instead of hidden at the end, and why the quiz disqualifies literally everyone who takes it, including its authors, including you.
There is no way to read this site for thirty seconds and come away thinking we want fewer people voting.
Outlets that do not exist, saying things we made up.
Six questions. Answer honestly. There is no way to fail, and there is no way to pass.
Six questions, twelve possible answers, twelve disqualifications. We built it that way on purpose — because that is what happens to every rule invented to decide who deserves a vote. Point it at anyone long enough and it takes them too.
There is no version of this test that a free country survives.
So here is the only thing on this website that isn't a joke:
Register to Vote →Not for sale. Screenshot freely.