Tea Party Nation President: Only Allowing Property Owners To Vote “Makes A Lot Of Sense”

Mediaite ^ | December 1, 2010 | Matt Schneider

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Good luck with that.

[FormerACLUmember]

Oh great.

A crazy statement that the Regime Media will focus on totally.

[LibLieSlayer]

It made sense to our Founders... but would never pass in this quasi communist state that we live in today.

LLS

[camerongood210]

Didn’t the Founding Fathers have a problem with that policy?

[pnh102]

Limiting the vote to stakeholders is a very good idea which does need to be revisited. But instead of property owners, why not instead limit it to net taxpayers who are not on any form of government assistance? There are many high income taxpayers who rent their primary residences, why should they be denied suffrage when they pay a large share of the bills?

The other problem with allowing only property owners to vote is it gives more of a voice to those rich liberals who want everyone to pay more in taxes because it tends to screw everyone else but themselves.

[hoyt-clagwell]

What about conservatives who rent or conservative seniors who live in retirement villages where they rent???

Many active military people rent/do not own property.

People realy need to think this stuff through before they speak...

[pnh102]

It made sense to our Founders... but would never pass in this quasi communist state that we live in today.

The Founding Fathers also never imagined that they would beget a country in which 1/3 of the adult population does no work and nearly 1/2 of the population pays no tax, but people who match said description are allowed to vote.

[lonestar]

Only property owners should be allowed to vote in elections that raise property taxes...for sure!

[Opinionated Blowhard]

This statement isn’t as bad as it sounds. He is inarticulately expressing a desire that people who vote have to have a stake in the game to prevent people from voting themselves free stuff on the backs of the “rich.” That is the curse of democracy and why democracies ultimately fall. We are on course for that.

[Darteaus94025]

"...limit it to net taxpayers..."

Exactly. Limit the vote to the Makers not the Takers.

[marron]

various “leaders” associated with the Tea Party can quickly damage the larger brand with their absurd comments.

Voting on anything affecting tax rates that you don't pay is wrong. It is, in effect, theft.

Only tax payers should have the right to vote on anything that affects tax rates or budgets. Thats not absurd, its absurd to allow non-taxpayers decide budget questions.

[Alberta's Child]

I wouldn't have a problem with this approach at all. In fact, a very strong case can be made that this is exactly how an orderly democratic society MUST function.

The definition of "property" might have to be expanded to include other assets beyond the traditional land holdings that were used in the early days of this country to determine eligibility, but I have no problem with the general idea that only people with $X (whatever that number may be) in personal assets should be allowed to vote.

[texmexis best]

Probably not a good thing to sayon TV.

I don’t think the TEA Party Nation reflects the needs of most partiers.

[paudio]

What’s the definition of property owner? Does having a time-share count? So, many young military men and women, who serve their country for many years so they don’t have property (unless inherited from their parents) cannot vote?

[pnh102]

Only property owners should be allowed to vote in elections that raise property taxes...for sure!

The fact that property taxes even exist negate the entire notion that property rights actually exist to begin with.

[cripplecreek]

Actually the states had their own policies on the matter. In some states they sold land extremely cheap to increase the number of land owners, in others you had to show that you had a certain ammount of money in your pocket when you voted.

I know a lot of good conservatives who don’t own their homes and only an idiot would want to cut them out of voting.

[Alberta's Child]

Many active military people rent/do not own property.

That's a very interesting point. This was apparently never much of an issue back in the days before the U.S. had a massive standing military instead of relying primarily on state militias for its armed forces.

[hoyt-clagwell]

but I have no problem with the general idea that only people with $X (whatever that number may be) in personal assets should be allowed to vote.

You would be excluding much of the younger active duty military....

[traditional1]

I would rather that only TAXPAYERS vote...those who don’t pay taxes should have NO INPUT into what is done with OTHERS’ MONEY!