First, a true and recent anecdote.
I bowl in a "church" league on Tuesday nights, and we accept anyone and everyone who wants to bowl with us - as it should be.
Last Tuesday we were all confirming that we had voted, and my wife asked one of our number if she had voted. This young woman is a bagger at the local grocery store, hired under a program where people with intellectual shortcomings are hired at a lower rate and given jobs that require minimal skills.
"Yes," she happily responded. "All of us from work went down after our shift today. We all voted for Biden!" Exploring a little further, she didn't know that Biden was a Democrat, or have any any idea what a Democrat is - other than it is different from Republican. She just didn't like Donald Trump's public persona, which is of course her right. As for the down-ballot votes, she was handed a Democrat slate when she entered the door (before she entered the door, I presume), and she voted for everyone on that card, just like she was "supposed to do." In her mind.
Of course the entire discussion was polite and pleasant, but I could not help thinking to myself...HER vote counted just as much as mine.
And there you have Elephant #1. The votes of simpleminded, uninformed (two different things), and oblivious people count just as much as the votes of intelligent, knowledgeable, and astute people.
Elephant #2 deals with what I call, "voter corruption." Many Democrats would not even accept the concept of voter corruption, because it is presumed. "Voter corruption" occurs when a voter casts his vote for no other purpose but to benefit himself, rather than voting for the person who is most qualified, and whose policies are best for the jurisdiction (country, state, county, etc.). So "voter corruption" occurs when a vote is cast in the hope of getting a personal tax cut, or personally benefitting from a social welfare program that is being pushed by one candidate rather than another.
These are not legitimate reasons for voting for a person. Voting must be civic minded, not personally beneficial.
Elephant #3. Imagine you live in a large community/subdivision that includes single-family houses, townhouses, condos, and rental units. There is a homeowner's association that, using dues collected from the residents, pays for the landscaping and upkeep of the common areas. The association requires dues from those who own their homes, but for renters it is optional. And renters get to vote on all issues considered by the Association, including expenditure of funds. Would this arrangement be acceptable to you, a homeowner? Probably not. The renters could band together and vote for costly initiatives that cost them nothing. It is absurd.
I think you get my point. In the U.S. today, people who pay no taxes (speaking mainly, but not exclusively, about Federal Income Tax) get the same voting rights as people who pay thousands and thousands of dollars in FIT. Indeed, many Americans "pay" a negative income tax - they get refunds of money that they never paid - under the EITC.
Would you want to belong to an organization that gave voting rights to people who don't pay their dues? Hell no.
So there you have it.
The outcome of every Presidential election in the past couple generations has been substantially impacted by people who have no business voting. In 2020, it appears that they will actually determine the outcome presidential race. It is preposterous.
If I were Emperor, prospective voters would be required to successfully pass the SAME WRITTEN TEST as is required for people applying for naturalization; otherwise, no voter registration. And voter registrations would be issued by the IRS. If you haven't paid at least a minimal amount in FIT in the past four years (say, $500), no voter registration would be issued. (Joint tax returns would count for both). Those who are retired would be grandfathered, of course, but at age 70, you would again have to pass the naturalization exam.
The Naturalization Interview and Test | USCIS
What could be fairer than that?
I bowl in a "church" league on Tuesday nights, and we accept anyone and everyone who wants to bowl with us - as it should be.
Last Tuesday we were all confirming that we had voted, and my wife asked one of our number if she had voted. This young woman is a bagger at the local grocery store, hired under a program where people with intellectual shortcomings are hired at a lower rate and given jobs that require minimal skills.
"Yes," she happily responded. "All of us from work went down after our shift today. We all voted for Biden!" Exploring a little further, she didn't know that Biden was a Democrat, or have any any idea what a Democrat is - other than it is different from Republican. She just didn't like Donald Trump's public persona, which is of course her right. As for the down-ballot votes, she was handed a Democrat slate when she entered the door (before she entered the door, I presume), and she voted for everyone on that card, just like she was "supposed to do." In her mind.
Of course the entire discussion was polite and pleasant, but I could not help thinking to myself...HER vote counted just as much as mine.
And there you have Elephant #1. The votes of simpleminded, uninformed (two different things), and oblivious people count just as much as the votes of intelligent, knowledgeable, and astute people.
Elephant #2 deals with what I call, "voter corruption." Many Democrats would not even accept the concept of voter corruption, because it is presumed. "Voter corruption" occurs when a voter casts his vote for no other purpose but to benefit himself, rather than voting for the person who is most qualified, and whose policies are best for the jurisdiction (country, state, county, etc.). So "voter corruption" occurs when a vote is cast in the hope of getting a personal tax cut, or personally benefitting from a social welfare program that is being pushed by one candidate rather than another.
These are not legitimate reasons for voting for a person. Voting must be civic minded, not personally beneficial.
Elephant #3. Imagine you live in a large community/subdivision that includes single-family houses, townhouses, condos, and rental units. There is a homeowner's association that, using dues collected from the residents, pays for the landscaping and upkeep of the common areas. The association requires dues from those who own their homes, but for renters it is optional. And renters get to vote on all issues considered by the Association, including expenditure of funds. Would this arrangement be acceptable to you, a homeowner? Probably not. The renters could band together and vote for costly initiatives that cost them nothing. It is absurd.
I think you get my point. In the U.S. today, people who pay no taxes (speaking mainly, but not exclusively, about Federal Income Tax) get the same voting rights as people who pay thousands and thousands of dollars in FIT. Indeed, many Americans "pay" a negative income tax - they get refunds of money that they never paid - under the EITC.
Would you want to belong to an organization that gave voting rights to people who don't pay their dues? Hell no.
So there you have it.
The outcome of every Presidential election in the past couple generations has been substantially impacted by people who have no business voting. In 2020, it appears that they will actually determine the outcome presidential race. It is preposterous.
If I were Emperor, prospective voters would be required to successfully pass the SAME WRITTEN TEST as is required for people applying for naturalization; otherwise, no voter registration. And voter registrations would be issued by the IRS. If you haven't paid at least a minimal amount in FIT in the past four years (say, $500), no voter registration would be issued. (Joint tax returns would count for both). Those who are retired would be grandfathered, of course, but at age 70, you would again have to pass the naturalization exam.
The Naturalization Interview and Test | USCIS
What could be fairer than that?
