[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...

[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.

[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?

[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!

[SnakeDoctor]

Limiting the vote to property owners does not make sense ... but I think limiting the vote to taxpayers does, with the caveat that we need to make sure everybody who can pay, pays something.

People who are living off the government shouldn’t have the opportunity to vote themselves benefits from other people’s pocket ... only people footing the bill should have such a vote.

SnakeDoc

[tophat9000]

Only allowing Property Owners To Vote “Makes A Lot Of Sense”

Only if Property Owners are the only ones paying tax's or are the major source of taxes

....As we now pay income tax...

Only allowing people that support themselves To Vote....

[DesScorp]

This was basically the position of many of the Founders, and they kinda had a point, ya know: the people who own the country will care the most for it.

[dalereed]

Add to that, my mother said that giving women the right to vote was the dumbest thing that ever happened.

She said that she always had the right to vote in the bedroom and at the diner table.

[KEmom]

I would like to see one person, one vote and some form of proof of identity to vote.

Maybe suspending voting privileges to those on the gov’t dole should be considered, too.

[RC2]

I’m not sure I go along with the “Property Owner” idea. In this case, if a person couldn’t vote, do they have to pay taxes? This whole idea, I believe, goes back to ancient Rome. Only property owners could vote.

[Jim Noble]

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

You betcha.

If we don't do this, or something like it, we're finished.