Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SmartInsight

Should the U.S. Adopt Compulsory Voting?

__________________________

Nope. But we should return to the Constitution when it allowed only land-owners to vote.


10 posted on 07/13/2010 7:53:59 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (PALIN/MCCAIN IN 2012 - barf alert? sarc tag? -- can't decide)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Responsibility2nd

“But we should return to the Constitution when it allowed only land-owners to vote.”

That’s exactly what’s needed, only people who have a real stake should vote, not those who just want to vote for benefits to themselves from the pockets of others.


39 posted on 07/13/2010 8:39:16 AM PDT by SmartInsight (Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote. ~ G. J. Nathan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Responsibility2nd
Nowhere is the requirement of land ownership for the voting franchise spelled out in the Constitution, and by 1850 those requirements were eliminated. There were specific colonial and later state requirements for voting; but they were NOT based upon the Constitution.

http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/spring07/elections.cfm

Property requirements were widespread. Some colonies required a voter to own a certain amount of land or land of a specified value. Others required personal property of a certain value, or payment of a certain amount of taxes. Examples from 1763 show the variety of these requirements. Delaware expected voters to own fifty acres of land or property worth £40. Rhode Island set the limit at land valued at £40 or worth an annual rent of £2. Connecticut required land worth an annual rent of £2 or livestock worth £40.

Ben Franklin lampooned these requirements for property ownership thusly....

“Today a man owns a jackass worth 50 dollars and he is entitled to vote; but before the next election the jackass dies. The man in the mean time has become more experienced, his knowledge of the principles of government, and his acquaintance with mankind, are more extensive, and he is therefore better qualified to make a proper selection of rulers—but the jackass is dead and the man cannot vote. Now gentlemen, pray inform me, in whom is the right of suffrage? In the man or in the jackass?”

Now we all know plenty of jackasses out there voting! But really? ;)

43 posted on 07/13/2010 8:51:47 AM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed. So how could it be re-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Responsibility2nd
But we should return to the Constitution when it allowed only land-owners to vote.

Then only government could vote. Stop paying your taxes and see if you really own your land.

53 posted on 07/13/2010 9:59:40 AM PDT by Malsua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson