Donna Brazile, Democratic campaign manager, DNC committeewoman, and advisor to many Democrats over the years, is whining in USA Today about about Republicans trying to deny people their voting rights. Says "The GOP is engaged in what appears to be a coordinated, expensive effort to block voters from the polls". "The motivation is political - a cynical effort to restrict voting by traditionally Democratic - leaning Americans."
What's she so vocal about? Bills to require photo identification at the polls. Claims 11%, or 21 million, citizens will be denied their right to vote. Hmmm, who got those people with no driver's license or any other form of photo ID registered to vote in the first place? The Democrats running their buses around the ghettos (now known as "hoods") offering people free lunches to register. First of all, let's be perfectly clear. Although there was quite a bit of discussion amongst our founding fathers as to whether only land owners would be enfranchised, as our constitution is written, those people, ASSUMING THEY ARE ACTUALLY CITIZENS, are legally eligible to vote.
Now I realize there are always exceptions to general rules. The Amish and Mennonite women come immediately to mind, but I would venture to guess that 80 to 90 % of people who do not even have a driver's license, or some other form of photo ID, would hardly be taxpayers.
My question for you today is: Is it really beneficial to have the freeloaders, those who contribute virtually nothing to our society, but suck at the government teat, vote? Remember, they are getting very close to being in the majority. Or is it time for a constitutional amendment so only those who pay taxes get to vote? Or only those not on some kind of government handout?
I am not advocating this at this time, I would have to spend a lot of time on research and trying to foresee all the ramifications. But it's something for you to think about. Please leave your comments below.
God bless America,
Dumb Farmer
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I see your point, but anytime a constitutional convention is convened you open up the possibilities of unforeseen consequences. Amendments added that have nothing to do with the reason the convention was called in the first place. I would look for other solutions first.
ReplyDelete