For the right to vote: Because rather than bringing science into politics, it would bring politics into every facet of science. Funding large amounts of science via politically-based processes has done a good job of that as it is but this would make it orders of magnitude worse.

And what happens when the official government position on a bit of science, upon which your voting rights rest, turns out to be wrong because science, in its capacity as an ever-changing best-current-snapshot of our best guesses has moved on? Oh, and it turns out it is in the best interests of some interest group to keep it wrong just the way it is, because otherwise it might let entire battlefield states sway the other way in the next major election because more of the "wrong people" will now accidentally get that question correct on the next voter survey. Not to mention creating the ultimate "teaching to the test" situation for the voters.

Interesting question, BTW.

For immigration: Isn't that actually our official, legal policy? I don't think we officially import low-skill immigrants. We unofficially do it, wink-wink nudge-nudge.