To the Editor:

I am very troubled by “States Face Touchy Decisions on Who Is Mentally Fit to Vote” (front page, June 19), which reports political efforts to prevent people with mental disorders and elderly people with dementia from voting.

Our constitutional right to vote does not require that any one of us make a rational choice. We can vote for a candidate because he or she seems most qualified, or because we like his or her face.

Fair-game campaign tactics highlight issues that have little to do with capacity to govern—a candidate who is part of a harmonious family, or who was caught in a tawdry affair.

To exclude those from voting who are already socially ostracized erodes our democracy, as it institutes a caste system. More darkly, it paves the way to eliminate dissent as “crazy thinking.”

Lisa Kole, M.D.
New York, June 19, 2007

Note from KBJ: That’s it. I’m demanding that dogs be allowed to vote. If liking a candidate’s face is sufficient for allowing a human to vote, then it’s sufficient for allowing a dog to vote. I draw the line at cats, however.