I don’t like this game anymore.
photo credit: alancleaver_2000
I’m never one to assert that an overly simplistic and idealistic course of action will solve all the world’s woes and create a utopia. As a matter of fact, the oversimplification of the problem/solution relationship is oftentimes the primary reason libertarianism is regarded with a great deal of skepticism in the realm of mainstream politics. That being said, I believe I may have come up with a two-part solution that may help steer this nation back towards it’s founding principles and away from the progressive socialist course it has taken in recent decades.
The first step to this approach was partially inspired by a friend of mine who posted to Facebook that he believes that anyone living on the government dole should be denied the right to vote. My take on this is similar but not by any means the same. According to The Tax Foundation, 40 million people who file pay no Federal income tax. That’s approximately 30 percent of the total number of people who file a Federal return. I would propose that anyone who does not pay any federal income tax be denied participation in any Federal election. If you aren’t paying into the system you really shouldn’t have any say in how it’s run. This would not apply to state level elections because just about everyone pays some kind of tax on the state level in the form of sales taxes, property taxes, and other forms of taxation.
How would this help? Politicians often campaign to get elected to high office by offering the voters free stuff at the expense of the “rich.” “Rich” in this context means anyone fool enough to have any significant tax liability from their income. This sets up a system that rewards those who don’t pay into it at the expense of those that do. It seems fair to me that those who have to support the system financially should be the ones who are allowed to decide how it works. If you don’t have any skin in the game than you don’t get to decide how it’s played. This would make the politician’s promises of free stuff at the expense of “the rich” evaporate. It may even introduce the foreign concept of fiscal responsibility to Washington. If the parasites who don’t pay into the system are prohibited from voting, there would be no cause for legislators to spend ridiculous amounts of money on entitlement expansions to buy their votes. This would bring balance back to the system and would encourage those who aren’t paying into the system to get off the welfare payroll so they may once again have a say in the national elections. I know this seems extreme and undemocratic. However if one considers the mounting deficits as well as the tens of trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities for entitlement programs democracy has ultimately proven to be the two wolves and one sheep voting for what to have for dinner.
My second proposal is much less controversial but I still think it would carry significant political change. Instead of holding national elections in November, we should hold them in April. April 16th would be the day I would pick. For those of you who don’t know, April 15th is the deadline for filing for the Federal income tax. The attitudes of the electorate are very different in April than they are in November. When a candidate for public office is offering expansions of government spending in November, it seems like a good idea. However after taking it in the wallet in April, it’s not such a good idea to John Q. Taxpayer. If elections are held on April 16th the voting public is bound to be more wary of politicians bearing gifts that will ultimately be paid for out of their taxes. What about the inaugurations? Normally they’re held in January and I doubt anyone would want to wait nine months before candidates are sworn in. I propose changing the inauguration date to July 5th. That would somehow seem fitting to inaugurate our candidates the day after we commemorate American independence. I know that seems a bit romanticized. I guess I’m really a sap.