CDZ Is a 200 dollar fee too much to charge for someone to vote?

[Picaro]

And Take the private ad money out of the election process, and use 'equal time' public media and print for campaigns will do a lot more.

Why do you believe freedom of speech is a bad thing?

I take it that you are aware that the "equal time" provision is no longer law?

Why do you think only those who can afford $400,000 for a 30 second spot on 'private' TV have the right to speak?

I'm in favor of a lot of things, one of them being taking the big bucks out of political campaigning; if you think that 'violates free speech' that's your opinion. I also support literacy and civics tests as a requirement, which no doubt denies somebody or other their imaginary 'rights' as well.

 

[Picaro]

Poll taxes are unnecessary and restrictive, but no problem with charging to take a civics test and pass in order to qualify for a voter registration card; these can be administered by local school districts as part of their 'due' for receiving Federal and state funds.

And Take the private ad money out of the election process, and use 'equal time' public media and print for campaigns will do a lot more.

The only test is "Are you a citizen or not". You don't even have to be able to read to vote. A Poll Person can read it to you and have you make your mark and it's legal. Much like a contract is legal the same way. That is the only test to vote. And you can't be charged a single dime to do it. It's paid for by taxes.

Doesn't have a thing to do with what I said: so we now know you would likely fail the literacy test and the civics test.

I do agree about the equal media and print time for campaigns but only for the truly qualified candidates. Get the Dark Money completely out of it.

It's just common sense to do so.

 

[Picaro]

Voting is not a right..

And what backwater Dictator Regime Country are you from? Certainly not one with the Constitution of the United States.

There is no voters right act anymore it was repealed in 2013 or don't you read the papers.
.The Voting Rights Act

The original Acts passed under LBJ mainly only applied to several southern states and had 'sunset clauses' in them, and they left such things as literacy tests intact in the rest of the country, like New York and California, to name two that had them. Blacks in Harlem voted in about the same percentages as those in Alabama and Mississippi did before the first Acts were passed until Nixon expanded the original Acts to include the rest of the U.S.

 

[Markle]

Why do you think only those who can afford $400,000 for a 30 second spot on 'private' TV have the right to speak?

I'm in favor of a lot of things, one of them being taking the big bucks out of political campaigning; if you think that 'violates free speech' that's your opinion. I also support literacy and civics tests as a requirement, which no doubt denies somebody or other their imaginary 'rights' as well.

What is "private" TV? Can you not gather friends together and advertise in the same of more effective manner?

I have a workable suggestion.

No limit on contributions. Every contribution is immediately logged onto a website available for anyone to view. In order to contribute, you must provide your name, any association for which you are an affiliate, along with any political affiliation. Entirely possible today. I can buy groceries with my debit card and it shows up on my bank account before I can get home.

Problem solved.

 

[2aguy]

Why do you think only those who can afford $400,000 for a 30 second spot on 'private' TV have the right to speak?

I'm in favor of a lot of things, one of them being taking the big bucks out of political campaigning; if you think that 'violates free speech' that's your opinion. I also support literacy and civics tests as a requirement, which no doubt denies somebody or other their imaginary 'rights' as well.

What is "private" TV? Can you not gather friends together and advertise in the same of more effective manner?

I have a workable suggestion.

No limit on contributions. Every contribution is immediately logged onto a website available for anyone to view. In order to contribute, you must provide your name, any association for which you are an affiliate, along with any political affiliation. Entirely possible today. I can buy groceries with my debit card and it shows up on my bank account before I can get home.

Problem solved.

The only problem.....if you have to expose who you are and who you support, the left has now made it their goal to destroy you..... There now has to be secret donations to protect innocent people who simply want to participate in the political process.....

This is one of the reasons Unions want open voting for unionization votes at job sites......they want to be able to retaliate against the ones who vote against them...

 

[Picaro]

Why do you think only those who can afford $400,000 for a 30 second spot on 'private' TV have the right to speak?

I'm in favor of a lot of things, one of them being taking the big bucks out of political campaigning; if you think that 'violates free speech' that's your opinion. I also support literacy and civics tests as a requirement, which no doubt denies somebody or other their imaginary 'rights' as well.

What is "private" TV? Can you not gather friends together and advertise in the same of more effective manner?

I have a workable suggestion.

No limit on contributions. Every contribution is immediately logged onto a website available for anyone to view. In order to contribute, you must provide your name, any association for which you are an affiliate, along with any political affiliation. Entirely possible today. I can buy groceries with my debit card and it shows up on my bank account before I can get home.

Problem solved.

Private TV is the the media, like CBS, NBC, etc., and no, they don't run your ads for free, they costs lot and lots of money; so do newspaper ads, leaflets, etc. Your 'suggestions' are merely what we have now, which is buying elections based on how much you got bought for, not on policy merit, etc. No need for that when the public owns the airwaves, and no need to line media pockets for our election cycles. Public addresses and debates and talking head air time can all be done on PBS for that matter, and in policy papers; if that discriminates against the illiterate and non-English speaking or those with short attention spans, so much the better; they shouldn't be voting in elections to begin with, at any level.

 

[Picaro]

Why do you think only those who can afford $400,000 for a 30 second spot on 'private' TV have the right to speak?

I'm in favor of a lot of things, one of them being taking the big bucks out of political campaigning; if you think that 'violates free speech' that's your opinion. I also support literacy and civics tests as a requirement, which no doubt denies somebody or other their imaginary 'rights' as well.

What is "private" TV? Can you not gather friends together and advertise in the same of more effective manner?

I have a workable suggestion.

No limit on contributions. Every contribution is immediately logged onto a website available for anyone to view. In order to contribute, you must provide your name, any association for which you are an affiliate, along with any political affiliation. Entirely possible today. I can buy groceries with my debit card and it shows up on my bank account before I can get home.

Problem solved.

The only problem.....if you have to expose who you are and who you support, the left has now made it their goal to destroy you..... There now has to be secret donations to protect innocent people who simply want to participate in the political process.....

This is one of the reasons Unions want open voting for unionization votes at job sites......they want to be able to retaliate against the ones who vote against them...

It's just as likely employers will retaliate, but yes, ballots should be secret as a practical matter.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Poll taxes are unnecessary and restrictive, but no problem with charging to take a civics test and pass in order to qualify for a voter registration card; these can be administered by local school districts as part of their 'due' for receiving Federal and state funds.

And Take the private ad money out of the election process, and use 'equal time' public media and print for campaigns will do a lot more.

The only test is "Are you a citizen or not". You don't even have to be able to read to vote. A Poll Person can read it to you and have you make your mark and it's legal. Much like a contract is legal the same way. That is the only test to vote. And you can't be charged a single dime to do it. It's paid for by taxes.

Doesn't have a thing to do with what I said: so we now know you would likely fail the literacy test and the civics test.

I do agree about the equal media and print time for campaigns but only for the truly qualified candidates. Get the Dark Money completely out of it.

It's just common sense to do so.

Depends on who writes the test and what group they are targeting to allow to vote. If they are going for common people, you are right, I might have a bit of trouble with it. But if they are going for people with higher IQs then I will breeze through it. Believe it or now, higher IQ people will have trouble with test designed for normal intel people and this is no place esplain why, Lucy.

 

[Markle]

Private TV is the the media, like CBS, NBC, etc., and no, they don't run your ads for free, they costs lot and lots of money; so do newspaper ads, leaflets, etc. Your 'suggestions' are merely what we have now, which is buying elections based on how much you got bought for, not on policy merit, etc. No need for that when the public owns the airwaves, and no need to line media pockets for our election cycles. Public addresses and debates and talking head air time can all be done on PBS for that matter, and in policy papers; if that discriminates against the illiterate and non-English speaking or those with short attention spans, so much the better; they shouldn't be voting in elections to begin with, at any level.

I take it that you are aware that the Hillary Clinton Campaign spent more than twice what was spent by the Donald J. Trump Campaign. Failed former President Barack Hussein Obama spent more than twice what was spent by the Sen. John McCain campaign.

So, what are you whining about? With the Internet having millions of sources, and TV having thousands of channels, are you going to push the toothpaste back into the tube?

 

[Crepitus]

Illinois democrats now have complete control....and they are levying a new tax on gun ownership...raising the fees for simply owning a gun to 200 dollars....which means the poor and minorities will have a much more difficult time exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights...

So....in light of that, is a 200 dollar fee to vote too much to expect for the Right to cast a vote?

They also want to require your fingerprint to own a gun.....so shouldn't you be required to submit a fingerprint to vote? It would be a bonus because then the police could use that print when they investigate any crime they decide warrants looking at the voter fingerprint database.......

Poll taxes are illegal.

Not aware of anything about gun ownership taxes.

 

[2aguy]

Illinois democrats now have complete control....and they are levying a new tax on gun ownership...raising the fees for simply owning a gun to 200 dollars....which means the poor and minorities will have a much more difficult time exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights...

So....in light of that, is a 200 dollar fee to vote too much to expect for the Right to cast a vote?

They also want to require your fingerprint to own a gun.....so shouldn't you be required to submit a fingerprint to vote? It would be a bonus because then the police could use that print when they investigate any crime they decide warrants looking at the voter fingerprint database.......

Poll taxes are illegal.

Not aware of anything about gun ownership taxes.

Any tax on a Right is unconstitutional......you can't tax the exercise of a Right.....

Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

Held:

- A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution.

- The flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the Constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise

Opinion:
...It is contended, however, that the fact that the license tax can suppress or control this activity is unimportant if it does not do so. But that is to disregard the nature of this tax. It is a license tax -- a flat tax imposed on the exercise of a privilege granted by the Bill of Rights. A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution....

... The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down...

... It is a flat license tax levied and collected as a condition to the pursuit of activities whose enjoyment is guaranteed by the First Amendment. Accordingly, it restrains in advance those constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise...

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Illinois democrats now have complete control....and they are levying a new tax on gun ownership...raising the fees for simply owning a gun to 200 dollars....which means the poor and minorities will have a much more difficult time exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights...

So....in light of that, is a 200 dollar fee to vote too much to expect for the Right to cast a vote?

They also want to require your fingerprint to own a gun.....so shouldn't you be required to submit a fingerprint to vote? It would be a bonus because then the police could use that print when they investigate any crime they decide warrants looking at the voter fingerprint database.......

Good for Illinois. They should make the fee $500.

We already have to pay for gun permits.

How about we just make it a $100 bill tax per right every year for every right someone is supposedly guaranteed?

Does that satisfy your lust for taxing rights?

Don't want to house and feed troops? Well that's too bad you didn't pay the tax this year to exercise that right.

*****SMILE*****

 

[TNHarley]

Illinois democrats now have complete control....and they are levying a new tax on gun ownership...raising the fees for simply owning a gun to 200 dollars....which means the poor and minorities will have a much more difficult time exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights...

So....in light of that, is a 200 dollar fee to vote too much to expect for the Right to cast a vote?

They also want to require your fingerprint to own a gun.....so shouldn't you be required to submit a fingerprint to vote? It would be a bonus because then the police could use that print when they investigate any crime they decide warrants looking at the voter fingerprint database.......

Good for Illinois. They should make the fee $500.

Lol right?
I can't wait until they start charging people to pray. Or have due process. Or throw you in jail for disagreeing with the govt.
Fun times are ahead. I truly feel sorry for my son and his children. And theirs. Etc

 

[Wyatt earp]

Illinois democrats now have complete control....and they are levying a new tax on gun ownership...raising the fees for simply owning a gun to 200 dollars....which means the poor and minorities will have a much more difficult time exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights...

So....in light of that, is a 200 dollar fee to vote too much to expect for the Right to cast a vote?

They also want to require your fingerprint to own a gun.....so shouldn't you be required to submit a fingerprint to vote? It would be a bonus because then the police could use that print when they investigate any crime they decide warrants looking at the voter fingerprint database.......

Good for Illinois. They should make the fee $500.

So you are in favor of a poll tax????

 

[Markle]

Why do you think only those who can afford $400,000 for a 30 second spot on 'private' TV have the right to speak?

I'm in favor of a lot of things, one of them being taking the big bucks out of political campaigning; if you think that 'violates free speech' that's your opinion. I also support literacy and civics tests as a requirement, which no doubt denies somebody or other their imaginary 'rights' as well.

What is "private" TV? Can you not gather friends together and advertise in the same of more effective manner?

I have a workable suggestion.

No limit on contributions. Every contribution is immediately logged onto a website available for anyone to view. In order to contribute, you must provide your name, any association for which you are an affiliate, along with any political affiliation. Entirely possible today. I can buy groceries with my debit card and it shows up on my bank account before I can get home.

Problem solved.

The only problem.....if you have to expose who you are and who you support, the left has now made it their goal to destroy you..... There now has to be secret donations to protect innocent people who simply want to participate in the political process.....

This is one of the reasons Unions want open voting for unionization votes at job sites......they want to be able to retaliate against the ones who vote against them...

No secret donations, that defeats the purpose.. If you want your identity secret, don't contribute. A contribution is not a vote. One can contribute to more than one campaign, just as people, corporations, PACS, do today.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Illinois democrats now have complete control....and they are levying a new tax on gun ownership...raising the fees for simply owning a gun to 200 dollars....which means the poor and minorities will have a much more difficult time exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights...

So....in light of that, is a 200 dollar fee to vote too much to expect for the Right to cast a vote?

They also want to require your fingerprint to own a gun.....so shouldn't you be required to submit a fingerprint to vote? It would be a bonus because then the police could use that print when they investigate any crime they decide warrants looking at the voter fingerprint database.......

Poll taxes are illegal.

Not aware of anything about gun ownership taxes.

If a non right can not be taxed what makes you think a Right can be?

 

[2aguy]

Why do you think only those who can afford $400,000 for a 30 second spot on 'private' TV have the right to speak?

I'm in favor of a lot of things, one of them being taking the big bucks out of political campaigning; if you think that 'violates free speech' that's your opinion. I also support literacy and civics tests as a requirement, which no doubt denies somebody or other their imaginary 'rights' as well.

What is "private" TV? Can you not gather friends together and advertise in the same of more effective manner?

I have a workable suggestion.

No limit on contributions. Every contribution is immediately logged onto a website available for anyone to view. In order to contribute, you must provide your name, any association for which you are an affiliate, along with any political affiliation. Entirely possible today. I can buy groceries with my debit card and it shows up on my bank account before I can get home.

Problem solved.

The only problem.....if you have to expose who you are and who you support, the left has now made it their goal to destroy you..... There now has to be secret donations to protect innocent people who simply want to participate in the political process.....

This is one of the reasons Unions want open voting for unionization votes at job sites......they want to be able to retaliate against the ones who vote against them...

No secret donations, that defeats the purpose.. If you want your identity secret, don't contribute. A contribution is not a vote. One can contribute to more than one campaign, just as people, corporations, PACS, do today.

Sorry, the targeting of conservative donors to various issues is a real thing. The left targets individuals for destruction, so forcing people to out themselves is dangerous.

 

[candycorn]

Illinois democrats now have complete control....and they are levying a new tax on gun ownership...raising the fees for simply owning a gun to 200 dollars....which means the poor and minorities will have a much more difficult time exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights...

So....in light of that, is a 200 dollar fee to vote too much to expect for the Right to cast a vote?

They also want to require your fingerprint to own a gun.....so shouldn't you be required to submit a fingerprint to vote? It would be a bonus because then the police could use that print when they investigate any crime they decide warrants looking at the voter fingerprint database.......

Good for Illinois. They should make the fee $500.

Oh? How about you have to pay a fee of 10,000 dollars to have an abortion done. What's good for the goose, lady....

The Courts ruled that citizens have a right to privacy which covers medical procedures. If you elect to avail yourself of medical services to practice that right, you pay for them. If you elect to avail yourself of gun ownership, you pay the merchant.

The difference is that if you choose not to undergo the procedure, you will experience the pains and penalties of childbirth. If you do not buy a gun, you will experience nothing of the sort. So it’s not an apples to apples comparison.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Illinois democrats now have complete control....and they are levying a new tax on gun ownership...raising the fees for simply owning a gun to 200 dollars....which means the poor and minorities will have a much more difficult time exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights...

So....in light of that, is a 200 dollar fee to vote too much to expect for the Right to cast a vote?

They also want to require your fingerprint to own a gun.....so shouldn't you be required to submit a fingerprint to vote? It would be a bonus because then the police could use that print when they investigate any crime they decide warrants looking at the voter fingerprint database.......

Good for Illinois. They should make the fee $500.

Oh? How about you have to pay a fee of 10,000 dollars to have an abortion done. What's good for the goose, lady....

The Courts ruled that citizens have a right to privacy which covers medical procedures. If you elect to avail yourself of medical services to practice that right, you pay for them. If you elect to avail yourself of gun ownership, you pay the merchant.

The difference is that if you choose not to undergo the procedure, you will experience the pains and penalties of childbirth. If you do not buy a gun, you will experience nothing of the sort. So it’s not an apples to apples comparison.

Uhm one is in the Constitution

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Illinois democrats now have complete control....and they are levying a new tax on gun ownership...raising the fees for simply owning a gun to 200 dollars....which means the poor and minorities will have a much more difficult time exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights...

So....in light of that, is a 200 dollar fee to vote too much to expect for the Right to cast a vote?

They also want to require your fingerprint to own a gun.....so shouldn't you be required to submit a fingerprint to vote? It would be a bonus because then the police could use that print when they investigate any crime they decide warrants looking at the voter fingerprint database.......

Good for Illinois. They should make the fee $500.

Oh? How about you have to pay a fee of 10,000 dollars to have an abortion done. What's good for the goose, lady....

The Courts ruled that citizens have a right to privacy which covers medical procedures. If you elect to avail yourself of medical services to practice that right, you pay for them. If you elect to avail yourself of gun ownership, you pay the merchant.

The difference is that if you choose not to undergo the procedure, you will experience the pains and penalties of childbirth. If you do not buy a gun, you will experience nothing of the sort. So it’s not an apples to apples comparison.

That is NOT the same as a GOVERNMENT TAX on the right and YOU know it.