I love it, however: the modern trend in democracy is leaning towards the validation of an individual's viewpoint in spite of collective opinion (anti-vaccers, flat earthers, and biblical literalists come to mind) until we can decide on what is "true" and have a system centralized around fact and not opinion; adding tests would just overburden a system that is only barely working.
Terrible politicians are a symptom of an uneducated electorate. People will vote for the Face Eating Party then be surprised when they start eating faces.
Consider for a moment how fucking retarded your exams in school sometimes got. Irritating trick questions, ambiguity, impenetrable language, the whole nine. Scoring 100% was virtually impossible if you hadn't done them before.
Is that really the system you want to decide who forma your national god damn policy?
Many of the politicians who can vote on issues are representatives of their states. So in theory they are voting not only with their own views, they are more importantly voting as the people who they represent would vote (a majority, virtually never would every person in any given group vote the same). Unless you're giving everybody of voting eligibility a test it would not be valid. It is the reason on election days there are additional things to vote for (increase in locality taxes for certain projects, and the like).
/s/
Is that really the system you want to decide who forma your national god damn policy?