Why do you want to encourage people to vote?
In the context of this thread, it’s insurance. The theory is that if you pay people to vote, people who are especially prone to desiring money from the government will turn out and vote themselves even more money. So you need a tax limitation amendment and a balanced budget amendment to prevent the taxpaying public from being looted.
Because our democracy is sick right now, with a wretchedly low level of trust in the government. The lower that trust, the fewer people will vote, the more the government won’t accurately represent the people, the lower the trust. It’s a vicious cycle.
But it ought to work in reverse: the more people that vote, the more the government represents its citizens accurately, the higher the trust in government, the more people will vote.
I think people don’t vote because the stakes just aren’t that high in our system. Apathy, not disgust with government.
You don’t need to pay people to vote, just remove the obvious obstacles in place. Extend the voting period to a couple of days, including evening hours, so folks that can’t afford to miss work have a shot. Including one weekend day would be nice.
Better yet, go to by-mail voting with a reasonably large window to return ballots (including in-person drop-off).
And the rest are Democrats.
The largest group that doesn’t vote is the poor, who, for the most part, don’t pay income taxes. So a tax deduction wouldn’t encourage them much.
Yeah, that needs to stop. That’s where the big fraud happens, is absentee ballots.
So make it above the line, like student loan interest and moving costs.
The working poor pay income taxes and then get refunds every year. The earned income credit usually comprises a large chunk of their refund. No reason we couldn’t put a little extra oomph in those returns with a voting credit (other than the fact that the people on top don’t generally want to encourage poor people to vote).
Do you have a cite for that?
According to a study conducted by the United States Election Assistance Commission, absentee voting creates one of the greatest opportunities for vote fraud and is the area of voting subject to the largest proportion of fraudulent acts
Absentee ballot fraud is also one problem that is completely unaddressed by voter ID laws, because absentee voters are overwhelmingly conservative. The GOP will never propose anything to impact absentee voting fraud.
That’s nice. The Ballotpedia page talks about how fraud might happen not that it has happen. Do you have any cites for absentee ballot voter fraud that has actually happen? I don’t mean a bureaucratic screw up or an absentminded voter, but real fraud.
Convictions come pretty frequently for this crime:
http://www.cookcountyclerk.com/newsroom/newsfromclerk/Pages/Absenteeballotfraudcasesendsmessage.aspx
http://txstage.ny.atl.publicus.com/article/20020817/NEWS/208170327
The 2012 turnout was 58%. Let’s say the U.S. had an explosion of this wonderful democracy thing (such as it is in a two party system where the populace is tasked with final approval over the elite’s favored candidates) and it was 78% instead. Would anything be different, assuming Obama still won?
I don’t have a crystal ball, so I can’t know for sure. But here are some possibilities:
-The more people that vote, the more people would be engaged in the political process.
-The more people that engaged, the more that politicians would be listening to voters instead of donors.
-The more that politicians listened to voters instead of donors, the closer we’d be to a functioning democracy.
-The closer we were to a functioning democracy, the less disgust there’d be with our government.
If you’re asking about specific issues–well, there is of course the indisputable fact that Republicans tend to oppose proposals that encourage voter turnout because higher voter turnout tends to favor Democrats, because our country as a whole skews left more than our country’s voters do.
Why on Earth would you want more people to vote? Have you ever met people?! This lady told my wife a few days ago that food stamps should be eliminated because they are run by a private company and invented by…and I swear this is a direct quote…“that there Obama president.”
So the real question is how do we get less people to vote?
People too uninterested to vote wasting their political power is a feature, not a bug.
I’m not really interested in spending a lot of time on the merits of the OP, but your claim represents a basic miscalculation regarding the nature of a tax deduction. The OP’s plan would reduce the taxable income of those 126 million people by $63 billion, but it would not reduce tax revenue by anywhere near that much.
If i can take a $500 deduction on my taxes, that does NOT cost the government $500 in tax revenue. It costs the government my highest marginal tax rate, as a percentage of $500.
So, if i’m in the 28% tax bracket, a $500 deduction reduces my tax liability by 28% of $500, or $140. The vast majority of US households are in the 15, 25, or 28 percent brackets, meaning that the OP’s plan, applied to 126 million people, would probably cost somewhere around $12-15 billion.
Again, i’m not arguing in favor of the plan. Just pointing out that a $500 deduction does not put $500 in the taxpayer’s pocket, or deprive the government of $500 in revenue.
Because the proposal isn’t for a voting credit, it’s for a voting deduction. The Earned Income Tax Credit gives people money beyond what they pay in withheld payments. It’s really a welfare program for poor working families. This plan is for deduction, which will reduce the total tax owed. But for people who get their full withholding back, a further deduction won’t help them at all.
If you’re going to set it up otherwise, wouldn’t it be easier to just put a big stack of $50s at the polling places like they used to? Vote and get your money. Lot easier than all the mess with tax credits and all.