Presidential Fitness Test

When I was ten or eleven (I know it was spring of fifth grade, I am not sure which side of my birthday it was situated on) my class had to take the "Presidential Fitness Test." While for many kids this is an excuse to get out of the classroom and expend some energy, for my over-tall, gangly, be-speckled self having to not only run but do push up and a bent arm hang was nothing short of torture. Add to that the fact that my fifth grade teacher (a man who exemplified the axiom those who cannot do teach) forgot to tell us when the date of the test. For this reason I was wearing a dress, one of my favorites with polka-dots and a tulle under-skirt. While I may have run faster if I had worn athletic shoes, and I was furious with being made to lay on the ground to do sit ups, it is the memory of struggling to pull my body up over a bar on the playground, my entire body straining to reach above the bar my entire class watching me (I am sure flashing my knickers to all of them) that stuck with me. I cannot think of the "Presidential Fitness Test" without a bolt of fear and shame running through me.
So what does this have to do with anything?
I have decided that we need a new "Presidential Fitness Test," not to test the upper-body  of preteens but instead a measure of fitness of presidential candidates.
Earlier this week Herman Cain said that if elected president he would "sign a constitutional amendment banning abortion." Regardless of your feelings on abortion this statement should raise eyebrows, because under Article 5 of the Constitution the president does not sign constitutional amendments. While there is plenty of room for debate about Roe and its progeny, and questioning their validity shouldn't make a person intelligible to be president not knowing how the foundational law of our republic should, or at very least should open you up to the sort of ridicule and embarrassment that fifth graders face on the school yard when they take the Presidential Fitness Test.     
Discussing this with my roommate we came up with quite a list of questions that should be asked. We agreed that the questions should be simple questions with obvious right and wrong answers, that they shouldn't have room for opinions, or academic analysis and that they should avoid political slant. The list we developed included things like:

• What powers are the president explicitly granted in the constitution?
• How does a bill become a law?
• What rights does the bill of rights grant?
• What are the cabinet level agencies? Or maybe just what is the order of succession to the presidency through some number of cabinet secritaries. 
• What are the branches of the federal government?
• Who are the members of NATO?
• Who are the Members of the G8 and the G20?
• Name the 50 states and territories of the US?
• Who is the leader of Canada? of Mexico?
• What is the price of a gallon of gas? of milk?
• What is the corporate tax  rate?
• What is the salary an individual working full time at federal minimum wage?
• What are legal sources of funds for a corporation?

I am sure that there are others, and that some of these could be removed and, I will admit that I don't know the answers to all of these questions off the top of my head, but shouldn't the president? I don't think that knowledge should be the only factor taken into account, I think President Obama's struggles stem from lack of management experience which can't be codified in a test like this. But why aren't people demanding a basic knowledge, why aren't people embarrassed not to know these things.
In the case of Herman Cain he is running in part on the desire to shrink the federal government, encourage the states to take greater control of areas that the federal government has usurped. It seems to me that running on that platform you should be aware of what a massive undertaking it is to amend the constitution, that this is a legitimate limit on the federal government powers, that amending the constitution was intended to be difficult. If you don't recognize those things then your claim of government overreach is nothing more than political opportunism and that you are willing to overlook it when it suits your agenda. 
The problem is most voters nod and ignore, they refuse to see that ignorance won't serve them well. This is why failing my test wouldn't result in disqualification from office but some sort of visual shame, a funny hat? a miss-tailored suit? Ari Gould style super soaking? Something to get people to understand that this is a problem for efficiency and it is embarrassing.
Basically if children have to risk embarrassment to enter law school there should be a chin-up equivalent for becoming president.