I've often wondered if universal suffrage was really such a good idea.
Lots of people vote who have not a clue.
Some of the Founders wanted to limit it to landowners; some to landowners who possessed at least $100,000 worth of property. This idea was voted down, but it was out there. The idea being that those who had a bigger stake in how things were done should be the ones making the decisions.
Not sure I'd go that route, but I would like to restrict voting to those who take it at least a bit seriously. How to do that is the rub.
Could we come up with a "test" that would be politically neutral? That is, not biased to either the left or the right in terms of acceptible answers? I have my doubts. Putting that power in Gov't hands could eventually result in its abuse, even if it started off the right way.
I'd favor a poll tax, of 1/2 a % of the per-capita GDP. Right now, I think that would be about $150.
Those who don't take voting seriously are not going to shell out $150 to do it. Those who do take voting seriously, hey you have 2 years between elections, all you have to do is save about $6 a month for two years and you're covered. If you can't save six bucks a month you've got more worries than politics.
I'd exempt people who served 4 yrs in the military or 8 yrs in the Reserves/Guard and got an honorable discharge, or were discharged early for medical reasons. I'd let them vote for free, since they already did their service to the country.
About 30% of America actually bothers to vote even in years where there is a Prez election. The poll tax would probably cut that number by half, maybe even two-thirds... and that might not be a bad thing.