[BurlyShirley]

What would you all think if voter-applicants had to meet some prerequisites before gaining the right (privelege in this case) to vote.
Would it be in the best interest of the nation if voters had to either.

(a) volunteer a number of hours to community service

(b) serve in the military

(c) something else i cant think of

All of this would be done without regard to money, power, race or religion.

Do you think it would be beneficial to have only those who care about the country and are willing to prove it as voters??

*(the above statements do not necessarily reflect the feeling of BurlySurly or anyone associated with BS Enterprises.)

 

[fourgivn1]

I think a lot of people would gripe that those requirements in some way/shape/form placed mental or emotional stress upon those who did not meet the requirements, and you'd be sued for one hundred MILLION dollars for coming up with the idea.

Although I think it's great.

 

[Tweek]

So, are we hoping to see less voter turnout?
I think every citizen taxpayer of age, regardless of what they do for their country or community, has the right to vote for the people that make the laws that they must abide by. It's inalienable.

 

[mrbigisbudgood]

Sounds like this guy.

 

[I Are Baboon]

The taxes I pay are not enough?

 

[fourgivn1]

Not according to the government. In fact, just saying that got you bumped up to the next tax bracket. Good going.

 

[Serial Midget]

Originally posted by I Are Baboon
The taxes I pay are not enough?

I say yes, simply being a citizen of the United States (and reaching the age of majority) grants you the right to vote or not to vote if that is your wish.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Hmmmmm........


Yes, I know it would certainly cause alot of problems from the outset, but would having only those who are willing to dedicate time to the country being able to vote steer the country be the right choice?
Perhaps paying taxes would only allow you to stay here, but you'd have to work for the community to vote.

This is all hypothetical mind you, but imagine all the work that could get done. Only people who really cared would vote.


Thanks for the hitler reference MrBig

 

[mrbigisbudgood]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Hmmmmm........


Yes, I know it would certainly cause alot of problems from the outset, but would having only those who are willing to dedicate time to the country being able to vote steer the country be the right choice?
Perhaps paying taxes would only allow you to stay here, but you'd have to work for the community to vote.

This is all hypothetical mind you, but imagine all the work that could get done. Only people who really cared would vote.


Thanks for the hitler reference MrBig

It DOES seem like an elitist kind of idea. Those who do this and that shall recieve control, while leaving those below us to live by our rules.

 

[johnny33fb]

Hypothetically it would work... if you had a society that was motivated to put in their "share" but this would leave the people that aren't left behind and since they have no say they get screwed and we have to end up taking care of them anyway. And the class system would just get totally fu*k up and we would probably get less done then we do now.

 

[Sideways]

Burly,

You are a sickminded man.

 

[LoboDelFuego]

We have already given up many of our freedoms in return for a government, plus we pay taxes. If people don't want to do the extra voting things, then they will not respect the system because it will not be representative of them. They would have no incentive to follow laws that were forced upon them.

I think you should have to take a test before you vote proving that you are educated. Or something like this: if you did not graduate from High School, you don't get to vote. Unless you dropped out because you needed to provide for your family or something, that would be acciunted for under the law.

 

[LOOnatic]

Originally posted by BurlySurly


All of this would be done without regard to money, power, race or religion.

Do you think it would be beneficial to have only those who care about the country and are willing to prove it as voters??






While i agree that your proposition attempts to raise the bar, re: the IQ and desire of voters, only the wealthy would probably have the extra time to donate time(volunteer).

So that tactic is socio-economically exclusionary.

I think we can likely agree that voter turnout is substandard as is.

Lots of morons who don't know squat are allowed to vote and while that ain't all good, it ain't exactly all bad. That's the price of living in the most free society around.. Better than living anywhere else ..

 

[Toshi]

did you come up with this idea on your own, or have you been reading starship troopers again?



it's interesting, but i think everyone should vote -- any cutoff is arbitrary.

 

[gish1120]

Not really sure what this has to do with MTBing... but,

I think as a citizen of the United States of America, we the people have a right to vote. However, many misuse that right. I dont like the listed requirements. None of them really prove anything. I do believe however that voting is a privelege that should be granted to TAX PAYERS ONLY. Right now, abusers of welfare and leeches of society, can vote more socialists into office- more people to give them handouts. More higherups to take our hard earned money and pass it out to those who haven't earned it. I am a supporter of welfare, but believe that it should granted for a three year maximum. It was designed to be a means of getting people back on their feet, not a source of income for people who choose not to work. So yea, for that reason I think that voting should be a privelege for American citizens who pay taxes.

-gish1120-

 

[eric strt6]

umm Burley only the motivated do vote [notice the fact that only a small portion of the registered voters vote] and as to your proposal nyet kamerad. I don't like people that mess around with civil rights and the constitution. 18 & US citizen + right to vote is a damn good thing. think not... go move to china only the select "party members" vote, no thanks. we do call this a democracy

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by Toshi
did you come up with this idea on your own, or have you been reading starship troopers again?



it's interesting, but i think everyone should vote -- any cutoff is arbitrary.

Actually, thats exactly where i got the idea.

Good call.

I suggest that book as a good read to anyone. Its not like the movie at all. Some good view of what society could come to be.

 

[Silver]

Yeah, the book is a lot better than the movie. Been a while since I read it, may have to pick it up again. I love reading old science fiction

 

[LOOnatic]

Originally posted by gish1120
Not really sure what this has to do with MTBing... but,

I think as a citizen of the United States of America, we the people have a right to vote. However, many misuse that right. I dont like the listed requirements. None of them really prove anything. I do believe however that voting is a privelege that should be granted to TAX PAYERS ONLY. Right now, abusers of welfare and leeches of society, can vote more socialists into office- more people to give them handouts. More higherups to take our hard earned money and pass it out to those who haven't earned it. I am a supporter of welfare, but believe that it should granted for a three year maximum. It was designed to be a means of getting people back on their feet, not a source of income for people who choose not to work. So yea, for that reason I think that voting should be a privelege for American citizens who pay taxes.

-gish1120-

I like your idea Gish1120.
I am originally from da deep south, New Orleans. I can attest to multiple generations of families who are all on welfare and have been as long as they know of. More or less, baby harvesting to maintain welfare benefits.
I heard some #'s on the o'Reilly factor the other day about the swelling transfer of payments(gov't assistance payments) and that is one of the fastest growing #'s in the budget. Once people get it. they rarely come off.
Similiar to a disease really.
I am an open minded person but i really don't think that our founding fathers intended for society to wholey subsidize a group of people who don't wanna work and have no intention of working.
Why should i\we work to support people like that?
And they get to vote and keep it like that..........
Sheeeeshhhhh........
Anyway, i guess i'm just rationalizing higher taxes with higher rates of gov't. dependance ='ing less bike part money for me..:devil:

 

[D_D]

Requring people to do stuff in order to vote is very bad. What if they don't agree with something they have to do.

Think how easerly this could be abused.

 

[Serial Midget]

Originally posted by D_D
Think how easerly this could be abused.

Stop making fun of our preserdent!

 

[NRSracer]

I can really only see how forcing people to volunteer/ serve in the military would help. It would rule out the Apathetic people that still vote, and may give this country better guidance.

 

[D_D]

Originally posted by NRSracer
I can really only see how forcing people to volunteer/ serve in the military would help. It would rule out the Apathetic people that still vote, and may give this country better guidance.

What so now not only do I have to educate myself in politics and go to vote, I also have do do some tasks that I may be morally aposed to and have been selected by the government to produce more votes for their party.

That sounds fair.

Why are apathetic people less eligable to vote?

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by D_D
What so now not only do I have to educate myself in politics and go to vote, I also have do do some tasks that I may be morally aposed to and have been selected by the government to produce more votes for their party.

That sounds fair.

Why are apathetic people less eligable to vote?

Bah!

Dont twist it.

Im saying if it "could" be done in a way that allowed everyone to volunteer on something they supported. Wouldnt communities benefit?

If one is apathetic about government, why would they care whether they could vote or not? I call that not being apathetic.

 

[D_D]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Bah!

Dont twist it.

Im saying if it "could" be done in a way that allowed everyone to volunteer on something they supported. Wouldnt communities benefit?

If one is apathetic about government, why would they care whether they could vote or not? I call that not being apathetic.

Well they voted in the first place and their vote is just a valid as someone who cares a lot.

I am still not sure how everybody could help, it wouldn't be nice to lose your vote because you are a single parent who works and has no time or live in a rural location with little community.

With the infastructure required to check all this you could just use tax breaks insted or spend the money on community inprovements.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by D_D
Well they voted in the first place and their vote is just a valid as someone who cares a lot.

I am still not sure how everybody could help, it wouldn't be nice to lose your vote because you are a single parent who works and has no time or live in a rural location with little community.

With the infastructure required to check all this you could just use tax breaks insted or spend the money on community inprovements.

Thats my point, it shouldnt be as valid.

Of course yes, it would be hard to work out things for single parents and the handicapped, but voting waivers could be given out for special occasions when someone wants to vote but is unable to help.

I think having people put work into a community would build more pride and patriotism in the community and hence the country than simple money.

 

[eric strt6]

this thread reminds me of Animal Farm "yes we are all equal some are just more equal than others".

go read article 14 section two of the constitiution
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,<4> and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

and article 19
Article XIX.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
and
Article XXVI.
Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

your idea just won't fly

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by eric strt6
this thread reminds me of Animal Farm "yes we are all equal some are just more equal than others".

go read article 14 section two of the constitiution
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,<4> and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

and article 19
Article XIX.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
and
Article XXVI.
Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

your idea just won't fly

dont get me wrong here. Im not saying this is the way it should be. I realize that people have the right to vote and all. I was just testing the waters.

 

[slein]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
What would you all think if voter-applicants had to meet some prerequisites before gaining the right (privelege in this case) to vote.

only if it were a privelege to vote would any type of service to the country be required. that is, unless you live in IRAQ. then, your vote means nothing... which really means sh!t for brains saddam insane (or whatever his name is).

could you run for office, but not be able to vote?

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by slein
only if it were a privelege to vote would any type of service to the country be required. that is, unless you live in IRAQ. then, your vote means nothing... which really means sh!t for brains saddam insane (or whatever his name is).

could you run for office, but not be able to vote?

Ok, please re-read what this thread is about.

 

[ohio]

Right because just because some single mother makes minimum wage, can't afford school, and doesn't have time to volunteer (an overwhelming luxury of the rich) she shouldn't have any say about how our government is run. Nevermind the fact tat she sews the clothes you're wearing, builds the cars you're driving, or grows the food you're eating.

To Gish: Do you really think that generation after generation of poorly educated Americans on welfare choose again and again to live that life? They are stuck there because that's where our society holds them. They have little or no access to education, and what education they get tells them that their situation is the result of the evils of their parents and grandparents. They have few role models. No one will hire them. They have no access to or money to afford birth control (or any education to explain why they should use it, or abstain). They are perpetually on welfare because our nation has erected SO many barriers to exscaping that life. Maybe if they can vote, someone will speak for their rights, and help provide them the education they need to become productive members of society.

I feel sick to my stomach.