1) Everyone pays some kind of income tax in my administration; we'll call it a "privledge of living in america" tax

2) Congress gets pulled into the social security system, that way they will work on fixing it.

3) Tax on dividends and capital gains stays as is

4) Top tax rate goes up 2% points

5) Education cut from federal budget

6) Immigration laws are enforced

7) We're out of the UN

8) Able bodied welfare recipients work somewhere or attend skills building classes

9) Mandatory military service for a year

 

Party-guess

What would strengthen my resume? A plan. But trust me, I have one I just can't tell it to you.

Dirt used against me? I'm as pure as a newborn baby, of course.

75Center gets my vote.

I'm sure many of our left-leaning posters will be offended but I would run on a platform which included, among many other items, a plank that stated that only those who contribute to the country by paying some income or property taxes get a vote. In corporations, only the actual shareholders (ie: those with a pecuniary interest) vote for the board of directors and on corporate resolutions. Therefore, if you are not a real "shareholder" in the country, you don't participate in the decision making.

 

Of course, it would need to be written with clarity with no easy loopholes but it could be done. Actually, I think it makes good sense and the country as a whole would benefit.

I'm sure many of our left-leaning posters will be offended but I would run on a platform which included, among many other items, a plank that stated that only those who contribute to the country by paying some income or property taxes get a vote. In corporations, only the actual shareholders (ie: those with a pecuniary interest) vote for the board of directors and on corporate resolutions. Therefore, if you are not a real "shareholder" in the country, you don't participate in the decision making.

 

Of course, it would need to be written with clarity with no easy loopholes but it could be done. Actually, I think it makes good sense and the country as a whole would benefit.

 

So why would you take the vote away from millions of college kids who are not paying an income tax because they are full time stuents and do not own property. They are the ones that will have the most to lose if a draft is reinstated. They will pay with their lives...but not to be allowed to be a member of the Scooterbob Corporation?

I'd have only two planks in my platform:

 

1) I would spend every minute of the next four years (eight, if I'm lucky) working on eliminating or minimizing the effects of money on our government. That would mean the elimination of PAC's, passing incredibly harsh sentences (life in prison - at least) for those found guilty of corruption, the elimination of lobbyists, etc.

 

2) I would strive mightily to introduce a bill (and get it passed) that would impose incredibly harsh sentences for any political ad that makes a claim that is false, or a personal attack. Ridding the political process of rhetoric would change our ability to understand what is really happening to us.

 

To the degree that we could enact these two issues, we would begin to give control of our government back to the people.

 

 

Frances

Diamond Dandy, your argument is strictly emotional. Why shouldn't college kids vote? Well, one valid reason is that they, for the most part, are ignorant of the issues involved in any election. How do know? I have taught them for 30 years. It is shocking. On the other hand, if they work part or full time and pay some taxes of some sort (not sales tax), they vote.

 

Further, in regard to the draft, there are many "contributers" who have "vested interests" in being for or against a draft. Think of all the parents of these college kids.

 

Your "paying with their lives but can't vote" statement is strictly emotion. The overwhelming majority merely register and vote like their parents. And, they can't go buy a good bottle of Jack Daniels either, can they?

 

Of course, an alternative proposal (platforms are flexible) would be to require that citizens pass a sixth grade level civics test and furnish conclusive proof of identity before being allowed to vote. If the sixth grade level is too demanding, I would consider third grade. In either event we would have a much more informed electorate and would get rid of a lot of fraud.

 

All I'm suggesting is putting a little more responsibility into the process. Of, course, we have a lot of people interested in "rights" with only a few demanding "responsibility". That, in my mind, sums up much of what is wrong with this country in 2006.

The kids I know have a pretty good grasp of the issues. If you have taught them for 30 years and they as you suggest " have no clue" perhaps you need to change the study plan. The only reason you want to exclude them is the majority would vote Democratic.

The "study plan" is what it is because of the "dumbing down" which saturates the public elementary and secondary schools and has now found its way into the colleges. The fastest growing area of higher education is in providing remedial learning. You can check it out.

 

Undoubtedly the vast majority of the nonproducing, the uneducated, and the uninformed voters would, as they always have, vote Democrat. You, and others, need to ask why that is true. Regardless of the spin, it is a fact and it is a serious problem for the country. We don't need to make voting easier. We need to set standards.

The "study plan" is what it is because of the "dumbing down" which saturates the public elementary and secondary schools and has now found its way into the colleges. The fastest growing area of higher education is in providing remedial learning. You can check it out.

 

Undoubtedly the vast majority of the nonproducing, the uneducated, and the uninformed voters would, as they always have, vote Democrat. You, and others, need to ask why that is true. Regardless of the spin, it is a fact and it is a serious problem for the country. We don't need to make voting easier. We need to set standards.

 

Could be the diffrence in the parties is just as you described. The Dems are all inclusive and encourage everyone to vote. The Cons want only stockholders, half of who survive on their inheritances to be eligible. Thank goodness that Bush has made the decission process easy for us dumb democrats this election.....can you say IRAQ ?

You have made your position clear. The "inheritance angle", though relatively immaterial, is always a good spin to rally the troops. Possibly we can use your approach on the UK basketball team. All students should be encouraged to play and should be allowed to play in Rupp Arena for the "Big Blue". We need to be inclusive. Why limit it to those who are qualified to participate? Wonder how many games would be won?

You have made your position clear. The "inheritance angle", though relatively immaterial, is always a good spin to rally the troops. Possibly we can use your approach on the UK basketball team. All students should be encouraged to play and should be allowed to play in Rupp Arena for the "Big Blue". We need to be inclusive. Why limit it to those who are qualified to participate? Wonder how many games would be won?

 

Ok....lets say only those over 7 feet tall can buy a ticket. How empty would Rupp be? In fact, by your rules, America would be rather empty.

The kids I know have a pretty good grasp of the issues. If you have taught them for 30 years and they as you suggest " have no clue" perhaps you need to change the study plan. The only reason you want to exclude them is the majority would vote Democratic.

 

You would be surprise how many I go to school with who are hard line Republicans.

Well, Diamond Dandy, I must admit that I see no relevant analogy between our discussion and the seven footers. If the seven footers are not contributing to society and/or are uninformed, they shouldn't vote either.

You would be surprise how many I go to school with who are hard line Republicans.

 

I agree. The one's that vote dem are usually less informed(not saying they're dumb, just not well educated on the issues), they don't like Bush and know he's a republican and vote opposite of him, or disagree with the war, and often times I think feel that dems support special interest groups more especially ethnic groups and the gay and lesbian vote. Yet they know little about the issues they're voting for.

 

However a large # of young voters say their vote doesn't matter. I always tell them to make sure they let everyone else that's not voting for the guy I want that their vote doesn't matter either.

Sportsfan41 makes some valid points. I think those who imply that college students are informed are, indeed, misinformed. The vast majority cannot name one of the nine members of the United States Supreme Court. Most cannot name either of their two senators or their congressman let alone having even a vague idea of the political philosophy of these people.

 

Most can tell you all about Angelina Jolie, Tom Cruise, etc. but couldn't pick out the governor of their respective states from a lineup of three. All the television news networks are biased-FOX to the right and the others to the left. However, in regard to these student members of the electorate, it is no problem because they don't watch them. They watch Oprah, MTV, Enertainment Tonight, and, occasionally, ESPN.

 

I would agree that there are a goodly number of Republicans among the student body. However, there are considerably more Democrats.

 

Regardless of party affiliation, if they don't "contribute" to the system and/or if they have no knowledge of anything other than the entertainment industry, they shouldn't vote.

Sportsfan41 makes some valid points. I think those who imply that college students are informed are, indeed, misinformed. The vast majority cannot name one of the nine members of the United States Supreme Court. Most cannot name either of their two senators or their congressman let alone having even a vague idea of the political philosophy of these people.

 

Most can tell you all about Angelina Jolie, Tom Cruise, etc. but couldn't pick out the governor of their respective states from a lineup of three. All the television news networks are biased-FOX to the right and the others to the left. However, in regard to these student members of the electorate, it is no problem because they don't watch them. They watch Oprah, MTV, Enertainment Tonight, and, occasionally, ESPN.

 

I would agree that there are a goodly number of Republicans among the student body. However, there are considerably more Democrats.

 

Regardless of party affiliation, if they don't "contribute" to the system and/or if they have no knowledge of anything other than the entertainment industry, they shouldn't vote.

It the criteria is the one you used above, I would not limit this to just college age but a good percentage of the American public.