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

Skip to comments.

Linking Voting Rights With Taxes Paid
Investors.com ^ | April 20, 2010 | WALTER WILLIAMS

Posted on 04/20/2010 4:58:25 PM PDT by Kaslin

According to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington, D.C., research organization, nearly half of U.S. households will pay no federal income taxes for 2009. That's up from the Tax Foundation's 2006 estimate that 41% of the American population, or 121 million Americans, were completely outside the federal income tax system.

These Americans pay no federal income tax either because their incomes are too low or they have higher income but credits, deductions and exemptions that relieve them of tax liability.

This lack of income tax liability stands in stark contrast to the top 10% of earners, those households earning an average of $366,400 in 2006, who paid about 73% of federal income taxes. The top 25% paid 86%. The bottom 50% of taxpayers paid less than 4% of federal income taxes collected.

Let's not dwell on the fairness of such an arrangement for financing the activities of the federal government. Instead, let's ask what kind of incentives and results such an arrangement produces and ask ourselves whether these results are good for our country. That's a question to be asked whether or not one has federal income tax liabilities.

Having 121 million Americans completely outside the federal income tax system, it's like throwing chum to political sharks. These Americans become a natural spending constituency for big-spending politicians.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: tax; taxes; voting; votingrights; walterewilliams; walterwilliams; williams

1 posted on 04/20/2010 4:58:25 PM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
24th Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

2 posted on 04/20/2010 5:00:50 PM PDT by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

You could also illustrate it the other way: imagine a system where every full dollar paid in [federal] taxes gave that citizen 1 ‘vote’ [though a citizen could NOT split his ‘votes’ up; they would have to be en block].

The “Soak the rich” policies suddenly bite the “freeloaders” in the ass... the poor would have no votes at all and “the rich” would easily be able to ‘buy’ the candidate they want.
{Of course there is something to note about such a system, decreasing your taxes decreases the power you would have in voting; and raising taxes for others would be equivalent to giving them power.}


3 posted on 04/20/2010 5:05:31 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius

In order for someone to have failed to pay tax that person must be assessed taxes first. If someone has no tax liability then there is no way that person could have failed to pay taxes.


4 posted on 04/20/2010 5:05:48 PM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Publius

So what do you think?
Would this restriction apply to state offices?


5 posted on 04/20/2010 5:07:48 PM PDT by Repeal The 17th (Greetings, and how are you today, comrade?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
{Of course there is something to note about such a system, decreasing your taxes decreases the power you would have in voting; and raising taxes for others would be equivalent to giving them power.}

Which would be unfair

6 posted on 04/20/2010 5:08:09 PM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

Good question. Considering what the amendment was trying to abolish, a liberal loose constructionist jurist almost certainly would extend it to the states.


7 posted on 04/20/2010 5:09:51 PM PDT by Publius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

>Which would be unfair

How so? Or did you forget a sarc tag?


8 posted on 04/20/2010 5:10:12 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

You probably would have to look at the constitution of the individual states, but I would guess It applies also


9 posted on 04/20/2010 5:12:10 PM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

And let’s not forget that Government employees don’t really pay taxes on their salaries. The “taxes” are deducted in a bookkeeping slight of hand; the tax-paying citizens, who are paying the Goverment workers’ salaries, are also paying the taxes.

VietVet


10 posted on 04/20/2010 5:15:31 PM PDT by VietVet (I am old enough to know who I am and what I believe, and I 'm not inclined to apologize for any of)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Maybe I misunderstood you. If so, I apologize


11 posted on 04/20/2010 5:20:46 PM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: VietVet

Aren’t the people in the military in technical terms government employees? They do pay taxes


12 posted on 04/20/2010 5:26:26 PM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I don’t think I’d be comfortable with any 10% of the population having 73% of the votes.


13 posted on 04/20/2010 5:27:46 PM PDT by ledzep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Full circle...

No Representation without Taxation. If you have no skin in the game, you’re out!


14 posted on 04/20/2010 5:31:02 PM PDT by griswold3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

I think we’re all getting pretty sick and tired of the entitlement crowd shoving their paws into our pockets every chance they get. It was a good idea in colonial times and it still is: no tax payments/no voting rights. I recently saw an article that said something like 47% of Americans pay no taxes—I knew it was high, but not that high. Time to make that change. Right after we clean out the corrupt morons in Washington.


15 posted on 04/20/2010 5:37:56 PM PDT by Czar (NRA Life Member)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

It’s like the old riddle.

Q: When at a party, who gets the last slice of pizza?

A: The person who paid for it.

I say a flat 15% divided equally between a 7.5% sales tax and a 7.5% income tax.


16 posted on 04/20/2010 6:01:11 PM PDT by Sergio (If a tree fell on a mime in the forest, would he make a sound?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“Those who cannot contribute are not allowed to retain their (voting) rights of citizenship.” - Aristotle


17 posted on 04/20/2010 6:04:31 PM PDT by Jacquerie (The law is reason unaffected by desire - Aristotle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sergio
I say a flat 15% divided equally between a 7.5% sales tax and a 7.5% income tax.

Yeah, but you know it wouldn't stay that way, and it wouldn't go lower either

18 posted on 04/20/2010 6:05:50 PM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

No taxation without representation.

No representation without taxation.

If I pay twice as much tax as the other guy, why shouldn’t my vote count twice as much as his?


19 posted on 04/20/2010 6:06:51 PM PDT by Enough is ENOUGH (Select conservatives for the coming primaries, now. Vote out the incumbents.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
And that is the stinking reality of politics.
20 posted on 04/20/2010 6:32:33 PM PDT by Sergio (If a tree fell on a mime in the forest, would he make a sound?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

That was my sign in Washington DC at the 9/12 rally-”No Representation Without Taxation, No Pay, No Say”

If someone has not paid taxes in last 4 years-not Social Security, but real payroll taxes, they do not have a dog in the fight. No Vote. All retired ex-taxpayers would be exempt and allowed to vote. All welfare, earned income, etc. should not have a say in our governance as they do not pick up the tab for the employees we elect.


21 posted on 04/20/2010 6:47:51 PM PDT by I_be_tc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Czar
I think we’re all getting pretty sick and tired of the entitlement crowd shoving their paws into our pockets every chance they get.

That doesn't apply just to the income tax either. I don't know how this could be worked out, even in theory, but voters that do not own real estate, should be barred from voting on tax increases. I've heard 'renters' brag about voting for this tax increase or that tax increase and they're happy as larks because they are not footing the bill. They are happy to see homeowners getting bilked as long as their ox isn't being gored.

22 posted on 04/20/2010 6:51:31 PM PDT by Outlaw Woman (Control the American people? Herding cats would be easier.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

You bring up a good point. Williams’ point would really have to be tied to those who had no tax liability, not to those who simply and for whatever reason, such as good tax planning, “paid” no taxes.

I know people who pay little in taxes, but whose tax liabilities are huge. Their money still goes out the door to the government in various ways, but they manage to limit their tax liability quite well. I don’t see them in the same situation as people who have zero tax liability and in fact often receive a “credit.”

I posted this on a similar Williams thread, but the sad part is that for most of the people who would be put to the question of whether they would give up their welfare check or give up the vote — you can guarandamntee they would give up their right to vote in a New York minute! As it is, Rats can only get their voters out by paying them $10.00 walking around money and giving them a free bus ride to the polls. If you said, you can vote but only if you give up your check, are you serious?


23 posted on 04/20/2010 6:54:38 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Sic semper tyrannis! Stop spending. Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: griswold3
No Representation without Taxation. If you have no skin in the game, you’re out!

And if people thinks that's too harsh, then repeal the 16th Amendment, do away with the income tax and all other payroll taxes and go to ONLY a VAT.

People cry that the VAT would fall "mainly" on the poor. Doesn't work with me anymore. Everyone should pay something. As a NY Post article said recently, if you can pay for cable tv, you ought to be able to pay a little something toward national defense.

If we had ONLY VAT, then each person could moderate the amount of taxes he paid by the amount of goods and services he purchased.

24 posted on 04/20/2010 6:58:22 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Sic semper tyrannis! Stop spending. Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Outlaw Woman

Reminds me of the owners of beach houses voting for massively expensive sand replenishment programs that benefit their homes, but are paid for by everyone in the town or even the state.


25 posted on 04/20/2010 7:00:02 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Sic semper tyrannis! Stop spending. Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

The beach house owners pay nothing? The people in that area should revolt against that. That’s nothing but unbridled greed...but it is definitely the same mindset as ‘renters’.


26 posted on 04/20/2010 7:05:34 PM PDT by Outlaw Woman (Control the American people? Herding cats would be easier.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

What that says is that the middle class is shrinking and the lower class is expanding. The rich are getting richer and in many cases their wealth is obscene.


27 posted on 04/20/2010 7:07:31 PM PDT by marsh2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I'm not proposing that we take voting rights away from those who do not pay taxes. What I'm suggesting is that every American gets one vote in every federal election, plus another vote for each $20,000 he pays in federal taxes.

Again, I think for this to work at all, it would have to be based on tax liabilities, not one what amount of tax is actually "paid." A taxpayer should not be "punished" for good tax planning -- and if the feds don't like that, then change the tax code so it is more like a flat tax.

How about this, Williams? Every American gets to vote for President. Only those with tax liabilities get to vote for congresscritters and senators. Think about it.

And here's another idea: Every American gets to vote for President, but come up with a way to tie a percentage of a State's Electors to the Electoral College to the State's taxpayers.

28 posted on 04/20/2010 7:26:23 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Sic semper tyrannis! Stop spending. Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marsh2

Wealth is never obscene.


29 posted on 04/20/2010 7:28:33 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Sic semper tyrannis! Stop spending. Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment. Problem basically solved.


30 posted on 04/20/2010 7:41:07 PM PDT by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
... but the sad part is that for most of the people who would be put to the question of whether they would give up their welfare check or give up the vote — you can guarandamntee they would give up their right to vote in a New York minute!

That is fine with me. With taxpayers making the decisions we might finally be able to gut welfare.

31 posted on 04/20/2010 7:45:27 PM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
And if people thinks that's too harsh, then repeal the 16th Amendment, do away with the income tax and all other payroll taxes and go to ONLY a VAT.

Do you really know what you're asking for?

A fat retail sales tax like the FairTax is fine, but a VAT screws us all by allowing the government to impose a snowball tax on every purchase we make.

And I agree with you about the need for a more regressive tax. It is long past time for everyone to pay SOMETHING in tax.

32 posted on 04/20/2010 7:53:45 PM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ledzep
I don’t think I’d be comfortable with any 10% of the population having 73% of the votes.

Are you comfortable with 10% of the population paying 73% of the taxes?

33 posted on 04/20/2010 10:04:12 PM PDT by Shethink13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I believe that this is exactly what our founders had in mind -- never the insanity of allowing anyone at all that pays NO income taxes, vote for people promising programs that must be paid for with someone else's income tax!

That sounds a lot like what Obama told "Joe the Plumber" during the '08 election!!!

34 posted on 04/20/2010 10:26:19 PM PDT by zerosix (native Sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

Oh, I didn’t mean to suggest I wasn’t okay with that! I was just saying for those people who think this would be a travesty for some people to lose the vote, they need to realize that those who would lose the vote don’t even care.


35 posted on 04/20/2010 11:15:24 PM PDT by fightinJAG (Sic semper tyrannis! Stop spending. Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Outlaw Woman

Renters are indirectly paying property taxes, which are included in their monthly rent. The property owner passes the tax liability down to the renters so there is enough in the till to pay the city/county each year when due.


36 posted on 04/21/2010 12:03:41 AM PDT by octex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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