A MODEST PROPOSAL FOR VOTING RIGHTS

Why Should it Be Easy?

In the interest of maintaining electoral dominance, the Democrats wish to ensure that nearly everyone can vote, regardless of competency or citizenship status.  They are happy to “buy” votes using taxpayer money.  How’s that working for you?

Voting Today

With nearly everyone receiving absentee ballots and with the ease of requesting a ballot if you don’t receive one, people who have moved often have the ability (and take it) to vote twice.  I’ve seen voting by people who appear to be here illegally; it’s not clear how they vet provisional ballots.  We know dead people vote; it’s how Kennedy won in Chicago.  And sadly, people who are no longer mentally competent are voting, with the aid of Democrat-funded voting “aids,” who ensure that the voter picks the right candidate, regardless of their personal wishes.

Voting is a Privilege

Dems like to push voting as a right.  However, does that make sense?  I believe we should restrict voting to stakeholders.  This term, widely embraced by the ESG crowd, refers to those who actually deserve a say in public affairs.  I didn’t invent this concept.  An old Nevil Shute book, “In the Wet,” includes a proposal that allows citizens to earn additional votes by their service to the community and country.  I actually loved the idea.  But we aren’t going to implement it here.  Instead, I propose the following.

1.   Voting by mail returns to need-based, provable issues.  Military personnel and people with permanent handicaps may need to vote this way.  The rest of us should get up from our devices and vote.

2.   Identification is required to vote and the ID must match the person voting.  Pictures should be scanned by voting personnel and the ID itself should be looked at to ensure it is not a forged ID.  In truth, it is easy for almost anyone to get AND many places require them.  It is not the insurmountable burden the Left posits.

“Voters across all demographics support voter ID laws in virtually every poll by almost 80 percent. This typically includes more than 60 percent of Democrats,” The Heritage Foundation wrote, adding that 64 percent of black voters, 77 percent of Hispanic voters, and 76 percent of low-income voters back voter ID laws.

3.   Re-registration on a regular basis should be required to again verify that the person lives where they say they do and that they are still qualified to vote.

4.   People under conservatorships and other mental impairment conditions should not be able to vote.  Their status should be communicated to the voting authorities.

5.   As stated by those creating Obamacare, adulthood is defined as achieving your 26^th birthday.  Experts believe that full neural formation, especially reasoning ability, is only possible when you reach that age.  As such, no one under the age of 26 should be allowed to vote.

6.   Election material and ballots should only be available in English.  English is the language of the land and to become a citizen should require competency in our language.  If you think this is an outlier, think again.  England, Brazil, France, Germany and Austria require language competency in order to apply for citizenship.  Why don’t we require it?

My Wish List

The above represents a basic structure.  But given that more than 50% of the country is considered dependent on government handouts, otherwise known as money extracted from taxpayers paid out to others, voting should be restricted to those paying into the system.

The IRS should supply a list of names of taxpayers to the voting authorities. A simple comparison run would create a list of those eligible to vote.  We could begin with the idea that if the initiative has to do with fund-raising (taxation or bond issues), only those paying taxes should be allowed to vote on it.  But in reality, if you don’t pay taxes at all, why should you be allowed to vote for people who promise you more free stuff paid for by the rest of us?  As Margaret Thatcher famously said, “The trouble with socialism is that after a while, you run out of other people’s money.”  We’ve reached that point.

It may seem extreme to restrict voting in this way, but this is stakeholder capitalism at its finest and purest sense.  Those who don’t pay taxes aren’t really stakeholders, as they only receive, not pay into the system.  Why should they vote themselves benefits?  This is how we might end up with universal basic income.  For those who think this is a good idea, read the Expanse series by James S. A. Corey or see the films.  The Earth has fallen into pieces and nearly everyone lives on “basic,” a situation that enervates nearly everyone and ensures that almost no one meets their potential.

What do you think?  Is it really a good idea to let everyone vote, no matter what their stake is or their competence?  Too many people vote for a good-looking and/or glib candidate, as if they are voting on a reality show.  That’s not rational, nor does it bring out the best.  Just imagine an election where the politicians need to appeal to the best, brightest and most informed.  I think it would be great!