Tags: 
Categories: 
No one who does not pay federal taxes should have the right to vote – period. We have finally reached the tipping point in America where those that have no financial stake in our government outnumber those that do. More than 200 years ago both the Founding Fathers and philosophers predicted the day when American democracy would end precisely the moment this unbalance was reached.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. (Alexis de Tocqueville)
The Founding Fathers set about to create a government that first of all would ensure liberty and then protect person and property – if effect, the Constitution protected the people FROM the government. To ensure against the momentary passions of a democratic majority, including spending the money of others, the Founding Fathers deliberately designed a governmental system in which most things cannot be done in a hurry and there are many checks and balances on what can be accomplished. Even so, Benjamin Franklin and other Founders thought it was unlikely the American experiment would last very long. John Adams wrote, “Democracy never lasts very long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide.” (Founding Fathers) De Tocqueville elaborated, “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” (Alexis de Tocqueville)
Voting was not a universal right under the constitution as drafted by the founding fathers. As one way of restraining excessive taxing and spending, the voting franchise was limited originally to white, male property owners because the Founders wanted the voters to have a vested interest in stability and property rights. (Original Right To Vote) It is actually a very recent phenomenon, since 1971, that most over 18 can vote. There is no original “fundamental” right to vote, it is a right that has grown and changed with the times. Unfortunately legitimate expansions of the franchise (women, people of color, youth) were adopted without reflection on other legitimate reasons to limit the franchise.
I can already hear the screams that I am both fascist and elitist - if those claims were true than so were the Founding Fathers who created an even more sharply controlled electorate than I am proposing. People also tend to forget that we ALREADY have limitations on the right to vote that everyone seems to accept. You have to be old enough (18), you have to be mentally competent, you cannot be an incarcerated felon. All of these limitations seem to be freely accepted.
Democrats have created a very successful party today by playing modern-day Robin Hood and using taxes to promise those not working or productive a way to live the American dream without the muss and fuss of the actual work. The resentment over this divide is growing, but unfortunately the productive side of American is now outnumbered by those living off of the work of others. We have reached that tipping point that both Benjamin Franklin and Alexis de Tocqueville predicted would spell the end to democracy in the United States.
We need to Amend the Constitution to require that to vote you must have some direct investment in the country. I would accept paying federal taxes as a threshold, but I just throw that out there as the start of the conversation.
HotAir
I think that is a great idea, one that the republican party should embrace.
You should push for that to become part of your party’s plank at the next convention.
Joe,
Won’t happen that way. It will be with guns – the military will take a side and there will be a coup or a civil war — and then a new constitution will follow.
-Sam
I like the idea too, only because it would be the nail in the coffin of a GOP that has been lost ever since Reagan.
How much federal tax must be paid in order to get to vote? Each time you put gas in your auto, you pay federal tax, every product you purchase, you pay a tax on.
Bring your tax return AND your identification… OR no vote…PERIOD!! Great idea… and I completely agree with you Sam… were in trouble.
As a recovering GOP member turned Libertarian, we are in trouble because Republicans have given us so many deductions for my kids and my house, that I can’t pay taxes. Fix the tax code, fix the spending, and stop this nonsense about disenfranchising the poor!
In the science fiction of Robert A. Heinlein we saw the exploration of a society which limited the vote to veterans of the military. In Switzerland they hold referendum votes on all major issues. To go to war they must vote democratically. It has been A VERY LONG TIME since they went to war. Amend the constitution – Give the vote strictly to current members of the military and veterans and make the decision to go to war their’s alone. If you don’t like paying income tax shrug off the private monetary system we stupidly and sheepishly allow these swine to call THE FEDERAL RESERVE. END THE FED. Terminate the IRS. Claim your Freedom.
I don’t want to get lost in the details here. The point is that you should not be able to vote yourself more money to be paid by someone else. With my kids I have learned that their behavior is completely different when they have at least some of their own skin in the game.
Of course you don’t want to get lost in the “details” because the “details” are ugly. This idea of yours is the very embodiment of what you nutters have been accusing Obama of; CLASS WARFARE.
What you and every other right-winger are doing right now is venting. You’re really, really mad and you don’t care who knows it. So in your rage, instead of keeping your ugly racist and very elitist views under wraps they’re spilling out all over and exposing who you really are, and it ain’t pretty.
And yet his picture looks like he is such a nice guy. We are in trouble because a lot of people thinking like this are our neighbors who don’t even realize that they, too, have no tax liability because paying Social Security and Medicare don’t count! An uneducated, unAmerican bunch they are!
Let’s start with raising the “minimum wage” to a “living wage” so there’s enough money after food and shelter to pay some taxes. Then we can tax active duty military. Damn freeloaders! Then let’s move on to Grandma even though she paid taxes for 50 years and is now existing on SS and cat food. Then we can hit up my 30 year old Downs Syndrome cousin. He can color within the lines but not a whole lot more. I’m sure my quadraplegic nephew can find work somewhere. His lips still move. I found a buck on the ground and sent it into the Treasury…now gimme my vote. Bachmann said a buck was enough to have “skin in the game”.
Sorry, GW…this idea is a fail. But nice try…again…at demonizing Democrats with the “modern day Robin Hood” meme while my tax money (via corporate welfare, farm subsidies (BIG ag), etc, etc, etc) is being redistributed to Republican owners of those private market businesses (because we know there are no Democrat business owners or taxpayers). Why am I subsidizing their silicone implants while my skin is being ripped off? Do all the federal taxes I pay that are built into the cost of goods and service I consume count?
Don’t dare intimate I don’t have “skin in the game” simply because I might not pay any or, what’s next, enough? “federal income tax”.
Maybe you should add a petition addressing your “poutrage” on the White House site. Your beef is with the tax code, not the citizens.
Must be a fun night for you Snoopy on the rant front. First, do you honestly believe that folks that are not mentally competent should be allowed to vote? You don’t believe that understanding the issues has anything to do with the right to exercise the franchise? Just FYI, we already have those kind of limitations in place – but they make really good examples to mock me none-the-less.
As to the corporate welfare, if you have ever read my stuff you know that I am equally opposed to corporate welfare as I am to individual welfare. You are right that there is absolutely zero reason that we should be giving hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money to Solyndra, General Mills or Coca-Cola. This is NOT a purely Republican problem as you suggest but is a bipartisan work of corruption.
Yeah…the Downs Syndrome was a bad example. Retracted. But “mentally competant” would surely take on a wholly different meaning were you allowed to define it. First it’s paying federal taxes to be allowed to vote and now you’ve already added “understanding of the issues” to vote. I believe what you mean is the SAME understanding of the issues that YOU have. What criteria will you add next? MBA’s to “understand” economics? Constitutional law degree to “understand” laws of the land? Perhaps biology degree so we know how “shut that whole thing down” works. Require tours of war-torn countries to garner foreign policy “understanding”? Or perhaps “community organizer” internships to “understand” social issues.
Yes, your post is mock-worthy as it’s a ridiculous proposition. I’ll be sure to take a dollar to the polls for the treasury next time I vote. Will four quarters be ok?
Snoopy, if I were to lay out a real plan for limiting the franchise it would be an academic paper of many pages. I would just like to have a discussion about what happens in a democracy when the “tyranny of the majority” starts to vote economic measures that will inevitably lead to the collapse of the economy as has already happened in Greece. I was actually got a police escort out of Athens and was the last person to get out of town on the first day of the Greek riots and the rhetoric there was almost identical to the rhetoric in the United States today.
Frankly, I’m offended that you would even consider a “real plan” at LIMITING voting rather than expanding it. As we’ve seen with the last few years of veiled attempts by majority rule Republican State legislatures at that limiting of voting, the “tyranny of the majority” does not just apply to economic issues. The “tyranny of the majority” has also been used by Republicans to regulate women’s bodies.
I’ll reiterate that it’s insulting to put limitations on voting based on “understanding of the issues”. As Santorum exclaimed – “What a snob.” and how so very elitist of you.
And you haven’t answered how much poll tax…I mean federal income tax…is the proper amount or what “understanding of the issues” means.
Unbelievable stance considering freedom and smaller government is the Republican mantra while curtailing freedoms are the actions being taken while you hold the majority.
Tyranny of the majority? Tyranny can only be exercised by power. These people have the power to vote that’s it. Don’t you really think that the multi-billion dollar lobby industry that exists exerts more power than these people’s vote. Seriously? You are the one advocating for tyranny and the poor and middle class are not the ones exercising it. Wake up!
OK I know youre all furious to have Obama another 4 years but stop & think do you realize how un-American this idea is?
Wiser heads have decided that enough is enough & voted to stop the Tea Party from destroying America.
Just calm down, learn to enjoy life.
If your ideas cant win in an open & fair election maybe they are not the right ideas.
Voice, part of what you say is correct – I stand by and respect the results of the election. Having said that, I think that we are going through a period of time that will become known derisively as the time of the “politically correct” which is the liberal mirror to the conservative committee on “un-American activities” from the 1950s. I wouldn’t have gone quietly into the night during that time and I won’t go quietly through the night during this sad time of censorship and oppression.
I like the concept, of limiting voters. I have had an idea whereas only persons not receiving government money would be allowed to vote exception to only the military personal . So military could vote since they have a life on the line, and any us citizen that is self sufficient could vote. So a partial list of those not allowed to vote would include state and federal contractors there employees, FBI, CIA, teachers, law enforcement, any and all persons receiving government wages or assistance, since there vote is a conflict of interest .
Don’t forget anyone benefitting from the nation’s defense. That would be a conflict of interest if the government protects them.
So it looks like noone can vote! YAY!
You see, there’s an inherent “conflict of interest” for any citizen of the U.S. if that is the criteria.
What do we do now?
I was in the military for 10.5 years and now I am a disabled veteran. I want EVERYONE to be able to vote. I would take up arms against a government that would disenfranchise the population based on wealth.
You miss the point, if a person wants to vote the would only need to step away from the gov. Trough. If they want to eat at the trough they would choose not to vote to get the benefit from the trough.
Its a conflict of interest to vote yourself more free stuff. You wouldn’t want a judge to to enter a judgement on a case that he has a financial interest. Of course not, he couldn’t it is a conflict of interest. Same with voting.
I’m not missing the point; I get a paycheck from the government, not a frickin handout. because I work for YOU! I can’t vote for a raise for myself, unless that ever comes up on a ballot – which it doesn’t. You miss the point; disenfranchisement on the basis of not paying a tax (to include a poll tax) is prohibited by three constitutional amendments. I understand where you are coming from, but Republicans actually created this by creating credits for children (earned income) and your mortgage. That is why you can have a family of 5, and make about 60k a year, and not pay taxes! Do your homework; these deductions were part of packages intended to broaden the base. Now you have people that are just following the tax code, but they really are middle class.
Do me a favor, your saying I should pay more than I have to so that I can vote, so relatively speaking, this is like me asking you to voluntarily pay an extra couple grand this year on your taxes to keep your right to vote. Does that make sense? The problem why this is so divisive currently, is because you elitists are engaging in class warfare, and a LARGE part of the class that is your enemy are educated, politically-motivated, middle class Americans with kids and a home – NOT people on welfare. And now that your attacking us, we realize first hand how rediculous what you are asking is. If a guy has to make more than 60k to pay taxes, then the code is broke – not the people. I’m all for fixing that, but I am wholly against your unAmerican ideas.
Matt, Those who actually allow this “idea” of voting rights for cash to enter their brain are clueless to how utterly repulsive an “idea” this is. They are the ones who should not be allowed to vote as there is definately a break from reality with thoughts such as this.
Geoffrey Willis wrote, “The point is that you should not be able to vote yourself more money to be paid by someone else.”
My reply: Then government workers, especially congress, should not be able to vote, nor should anyone in the private sector who has been granted a government contract.
I’m a government worker, and I do give up a lot of rights to be a government worker. That is why it is called “government service.” And I sacrifice income for job security and benefits. I make about 50% of what I could make in industry. I choose to do it because of my investment of my time in the military. I wanted to continue to serve my country even though I can no longer take up arms for close-minded people like you. And you want to take my right to vote. I vote for people to represent me, not vote on a raise.
@sherri above is 100% correct.
If you live here, you pay various taxes every time you buy something. (except most food & drugs)
Willis, indeed the devil is in the details, and the Greedy Old Pharts of today’s Republican party wouldn’t dare do that. Otherwise everyone could clearly see how they are screwing the country.
Sorry, you folks are NOT the same party that Abraham Lincoln founded.
Hadenuff – How are we not the “same party that Abraham Lincoln founded.” I would also ask you why you act as if a complete departure from a limited franchise envisioned by the Founding Fathers is such a good thing?
The tax payers don’t have a prayer. There is no organization anywhere looking out for the tax payers, be it state, city, federal, county, schools, etc the list goes on and on. We have to start a group to keep watch on our elected officals. I also think only property owners should be able to vote. We are the the ones with the skin in the game. I say break away from the union, start a flat 10% tax for state and sales, then we could keep all the money here in ohio, instead of allowing the feds to just hand it over to other countries, just so they can buy arms to kill us. Yes I do think soon the military will turn on BHO.
Shame I am from Ohio. I was in the military for 10.5 years and am now a disabled veteran. We take a oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies and the lawful orders of those appointed over us. BHO, as you call him, is the legitimately elected Commander-in-Chief. I am saddened to think that Americans like you think that our Armed Forces would turn on a President because we didn’t like some of his policies. If that were the case, we would have turned on Bush, and we voted for him. Do you think we actually like being shot at in the name of, let’s face it, cheap oil?
I’m getting a bit pissed off by all of the people whom are maneuvering to subvert the election results because things didn’t go their way. I want to clarify that I am not talking about people that have legitimate concerns about possible voter fraud. If I thought I observed fraud, I wouldn’t want anyone dismissing me, and I am not dismissing them.
I am talking about the people that are manipulating the spirit of the Constitution vy petitioning their state not to cast their votes in the electoral college (red states), because if 18 states don’t, then the House of Representatives gets to determine the President. I know, nice try, I am sure this happens every election, but with social media, we now encounter it everywhere on the web. While the contingency is true as specified by the 12th Amendment, what these people are calling for is the subversion of 18 states’ constitutions which prescribes how their electors must cast their vote.
The other thing that is really getting old is everyone who is saying that if I don’t pay taxes, I shouldn’t have the right to vote. SCREW YOU PEOPLE. I didn’t pay federal income taxes while I was in the Army. (most every enlisted servicemember does not make enough, especially if they have a dependent.) Should I not have the right to vote? I still may not pay income taxes this year (remains to be seen with how the tax code shakes out, and hey, it’s my first full year as a civilian.) I am a disabled veteran that may, or may not pay income taxes. Should I not have the right to vote. I don’t know my grandma’s and grandpa’s financial situations, but I doubt they pay taxes. Should two of the wisest, most experience people in life not have the right to vote? Think before you open your big-dumb mouths and piss off a large portion of the American populace (us 47%ers).
Aside from pissing me off, let’s talk about a more fundamental reason for universal adult suffrage: First of all, universal suffrage is the only way to protect the rights of the people whom you claim are unqualified to vote. Some countries require a literacy test to vote. In Africa, where many literacy rates hover between 10-25%, who do you think the literate people you refer to are? They are rich, the rich who have become rich off of the accumulation of wealth from profiting off the poor, and in many cases, even fraudulent and criminal activities.
Let’s take it a step further. The same was true in our country when we applied gender and race tests to suffrage. Before women’s suffrage, women could not protect their rights because they did not have a say with a vote. The same with African American and Native American suffrage. I don’t think I need to point out examples of how us WASPs violated these peoples’s rights, do I? Then do we deny the voice of the voter who believes his government is oppressive and responsible for literal injustices, victimized by economic policy, etc? No, we just frickin can’t. One day, regardless of your personal wealth, you may be the one with your back to the wall, a victim to injustice.
Listen, I am as frustrated as you are by an uneducated populace (not meaning “uneducated” in the literal sense, but rather people who don’t take the time to research the issues and cast their vote with reasonable thought), but simply put, universal suffrage is the surest way to protect other fundamental rights, at least conceptually. When it comes to the constitution, you have to go with the spirit of it. Democracy is a grand experiment where reality is often different than intent, but it is the intent by which our freedom is measured and legitimized by the world – not reality. If we were judged by reality, no country on the planet could ever be considered free because government creates power. The ultimate derivative of power is that people are oppressed.
Here I go again with our founding documents…
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Therefore, being a civil society, we have, as a people, theoretically, consented to be governed. It is through suffrage “that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” Instead of having revolutions, we call our bloodless revolutions “mandates” nowadays. It is our way to abolish and institute government.
If you want history to repeat itself, just try taking suffrage from patriotic “British-turned-Americans” Americans again. We fought a war because we had no voice. Take away that voice and I bet it ends the same way today. I’ll grant you that there is too much financial influence and that America is too big and diverse to effectively promote consensus these days, but that is another argument for another day.
We have a lot of clichés today that illustrate this. “Better to be judged by 12, than carried by six.” “Better to let ten guilty men go free, than condemn one innocent man.” I submit to you another, “Better to let 230 million idiots and poor people vote, than to deny one vote,” or from my perspective “Better to let 230 million idiots and the 1% vote, than to deny me mine.”
You, sir, are uneducated on the composition of the populace who does not pay federal income taxes. Perhaps we should have a politically literacy test for people like you to vote. See how you feel about disenfranchisement then? The fact is, what you are advocating for, to take my vote; well the only way you are going to do it is take my life.