There should be an elegibility test for voting

[run_to_win]

Obviously it would never happen. They could make votes weighted.  guy with phd 5 votes, hick like in the video 1 vote, graduate college 3 votes. 

I think it would be interesting to weigh votes to the amount of taxes paid.  People who pay no taxes get 1 vote so they're not disenfranchised.  The votes of people who pay huge amounts of taxes equal 100 votes.

Let the people paying the bills make the decisions.  I wonder if anything would be different.

[Phishfan]

Is she drunk or something?  She's slurring.

The driver of the motorcycle said something crazy.  It was silly speak.

Yes, you can see the driver with a beer at one point.

[Phishfan]

Let the people paying the bills make the decisions.  I wonder if anything would be different.

There can probably be an argument made that this is already happening. Lobbyists have cause a lot of problems.

[Fau Teixeira]

Who read the title and didn't immediately know that this was going to be played? 



But geez, the first response? 

yeah .. how dare someone refer to something that was common practice 50 years ago,.

forgive and forget right?

never mind that what was suggested by the idea first posted is very similar in concept .. never mind that it violates the constitution of this country .. someone brought up part of the seedy history of this country .. therefore they must be race baiting or they hate america ..

i wish sometimes people would try to understand history so we can avoid repeating the same errors we've made in the past as a society ..

what's next .. separate but equal marriage .. nah .. couldn't happen in this country ?

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Who read the title and didn't immediately know that this was going to be played? 


But geez, the first response? 

What is wrong with you?  The fact of the matter is poll taxes etc have been used to deny minorities the right to vote.  And any "test" would be used likewise. 

It is a dumb and unconstitutional idea.   

[bsfins]

Damn Frimp..See I invite you over to my shack,that I call a house,and you go off and film my niegbors.....Post it on the internet....

Nope Phish....I'm not shocked at all......I see these people constantly,I'm surounded by them....

[bsmooth]

Who read the title and didn't immediately know that this was going to be played? 



But geez, the first response? 

HAHA, wow you are really a GOP kool aid drinking tool. I would go into how this is a sad part of our history less than 100 years ago, but Fau covered it fairly well.
I will put in an order for your clownshoes on payday.

[Buddhagirl]

I finally got to take a look at this. (Boss was around ALL day.) This woman scares me.

[Frimp]

What is wrong with you?  The fact of the matter is poll taxes etc have been used to deny minorities the right to vote.  And any "test" would be used likewise. 

It is a dumb and unconstitutional idea.   

How so? All I'm talking about is a simple test. Questions that everyone should have learned by the 7th grade. You go there, take the test, and if you don't pass, study up, and try again next time. There is a test for citizenship. Why not a test for the privilege of voting?

And before the race card gets played again, let me remind you that I was not the one who brought it up, and the people in this video are white, and more than likely will vote for McCain (who I voted for) if they can make it to the polls without getting a DUI.

[SCFinfan]

If I'm correct, I think that NO absolute bars can be put on voting without a compelling reason to explain them.  For instance, I think that one can be barred from voting in a local election if you don't own property there... don't take my word for it though. 

Poll taxes are for sure unconstitutional.  Literacy tests, while not explicitly unconstitutional, either face heavy scrutiny or are outright barred by the Voting Rights Act.

A concise way of putting it may be this:

Restrictions on access to the electoral process must survive exacting scrutiny; restrictions can be sustained only if it furthers a vital governmental interest which is achieved by means which do not unfairly or unnecessarily burden a minority party's or individual candidate's interest in continued availability of the political opportunity.

[Dphins4me]

  One rule for eligibility should be if you are living off the Gov. then you do not have the ability to vote.  If you cannot be a contributing member to the country then you do not have a say in it.

BTW.  Does everyone not know that we do not have the RIGHT to vote.  No where does it say that American has the right to vote?

[run_to_win]

There can probably be an argument made that this is already happening. Lobbyists have cause a lot of problems.

Lobbyist money is not the same as tax revenue.  Lobbyists are buying support, not funding the government. 

[Sunstroke]

I think it would be interesting to weigh votes to the amount of taxes paid.  People who pay no taxes get 1 vote so they're not disenfranchised.  The votes of people who pay huge amounts of taxes equal 100 votes...

Yes, because a corrupt and unethical businessman who makes $20 million per year should definitely have much more say in our government (50 times more?) than a high school teacher who makes $40k.

Frightening stuff there, RTW...that's only about a half step removed from saying "sterilize all but the rich, so that the poor don't breed."

[Frimp]

  One rule for eligibility should be if you are living off the Gov. then you do not have the ability to vote.  If you cannot be a contributing member to the country then you do not have a say in it.

BTW.  Do anyone not know that we do not have the RIGHT to vote.  No where does it say that American has the right to vote?

I definately agree there...And, yes I did know that.

[run_to_win]

Someone suggests creating a more educated electorate and everyone automatically assumes that minorities won't make the cut. 

I'm not sure if I should laugh, be disgusted, or offer to loan you my sheet.