Voting with photo ID

Voting with Photo Identification should be the norm... but it's not.

The current methods employed to vote in central New York State encourage voter fraud.

Consider the following...

Yesterday I voted on a referendum for the local government (school district) to raise 5,500,000 U.S. Dollars by increasing the school tax imposed on home owners.

If passed, the home owner would have to pay an extra $8 for every $100,000 of assessed value on their real estate holdings. The referendum passed with 520 voters effectively saying "Tax more of the daylights out of us!" and 93 said "Keep your tax raising schemes away from me!"

When I approached the voting area I did not have to show any form of identification.

I did not have to prove that I was a resident of the locale in which I was casting my vote.

I did not have to show proof of age.

I did not have to show proof of citizenship.

I did not have to say a single solitary word to prove that I could speak English.

I did not have to show that I knew how to read.

Yet, I was allowed to step up to a table and on blank line #48 I wrote my name, signed my name, wrote down my address and then proceeded to a voting machine.

Once I had positioned myself in front of the voting console, and with the opened curtains behind me I pulled a red handled lever from left to right thereby closing the curtains behind me and allowing me to cast my vote.

Voting was for a single referendum item. If I wanted to have more taxes heaped upon me I simply had to flip a blue tab for "yes" and if I did not want to be taxed was given the option to flip a red tab for "no".

I will keep my actual voting decision confidential but suffice it to say that people who cast a "no" vote will have to cough up the extra taxes because more people voted for the referendum than against it.

Here's a thought for all those people who like getting taxed: "If you don't feel you're paying enough taxes why don't you pull out your wallet and make a generous donation to your favorite autonomous taxing authority."

Here's another thought: "Why doesn't the local, State and Federal governments raise the money they need by taking donations instead of taxing the populace?" (Answer in post script at end of this post.)

Being a true believer that voters should prove that they are eligible to vote, and since I practice what I preach, I did the following.

When I approached the person who was in charge of the "sign-in" sheet I plainly plopped my driver's license face up on the table next to the register.

As I was filling in the blanks on line #48 an official voting booth observer and the voting booth assistant both made comical remarks about my showing a photo id.

"Now, that's the first time we saw that happen today."

"He's just showing his license to make sure he's not under age."

"He doesn't want us to think he's not old enough to vote."

Wow!!!!

I didn't say a word during the entire process. I didn't acknowledge their pithy remarks or show that I knew how to speak English.

I simply signed-in, voted and left.

Oh yes, I made certain I left with my identification. Not only did I need it to drive home legally but, I'll need it the next time I head out to the voting booth.

Respectfully,
Gerard LeBlond
AboutYourWealth.com and SellinfoProductsOnline.com

P.S. Why don't governments subsist solely on donations? They fear that they won't get as much from donations as they would from taxation.

How To Legally Pick Pockets And Keep Your Day Job

On Thursday, 28 September 2006, the voters of the central New York town of DeWitt were given the opportunity to control how much taxes they pay at the local level and they opted for more taxes.

Here's the background: The Jamesville-DeWitt School district is seeing increased enrollments. They need to expand and make building improvements.

So, the powers-to-be determined that $5.5 million would be needed to get the job done.

Now, it's one thing to know what you need and its an entirely different thing to actually get it.

If a private school needed to raise that amount of money they would conduct a fund raising campaign. They would approach wealthy benefactors and explain why donated monies are needed and how they would be put to good use.

Through skillful persuasion methods (no torture, no extortion, no bribes, no blackmail, no deception, no bullying tactics would be needed) the funds would be raised.

And, if necessary other fund raising tools would be used such as:

Bake sales;

Raffles;

Donated time from volunteers;

Donated items;

Auctions;

Bingo/beano parties;

Sweepstake calendars;

School band concerts where admission tickets are sold along with food concessions;

Pancake breakfasts;

Spaghetti suppers;

Bean suppers;

Dances;

House plant sales;

White-tie Gala Ball;

Raising the tuition;

Imposing a capital improvement fee to the tuition bill;

Charging user fees;

etc.

And the beauty of it all manifests itself in parents, of kids who actually attend the school, jump in and contribute...

Now, it's true that 100% participation never occurs but with sufficient prodding from the school's principal and from board members a surprising number of parents step-up-to-the-plate and things get done. But, based on my experience...

When it comes to public schools, the publicly subsidized school administrators have an easier way to get the cash flowing into their schools' coffers... just turn on the tax spigot.

In this way, you don't have to get parents involved, you don't need to remind parents that they are responsible for their children's education... no,

By taxing the overall population you force everyone to pay.

It doesn't matter that Mr. and Mrs. Jones are retired and aren't using the public schools to educate their progeny.

It doesn't matter that Miss Smith doesn't have kids.

It doesn't matter that Mr. and Mrs. Adams send all of their kids to private schools, pay their taxes and pay the private school tuition with "after-tax-dollars".

It doesn't matter that Mr. and Mrs. Hubbard no longer have school aged kids and aren't putting a strain on the school system.

No, none of that matters because they all have to pay taxes to educate somebody else's kid. And if they don't they risk having their property seized and risk imprisonment.

So, now that you know the background let's look at how well the citizens of Jamesville-DeWitt managed to control the taxes that they need to pay.

On 28 September 2006, out of a population of about 25,000, less than 700 voters voted for or against a school expansion and building improvement referendum to raise $5,500,000 through a tax increase.

The Jamesville-DeWitt School District Superindendent claimed the money was needed to handle increasing enrollments and that passage would only mean an extra $8 of taxes per year per $100,000 property assesssment.

The referendum passed with 520 votes in favor and 93 against.

According to the bureaucrats the State of NY would kick-in 70% of the school expansion and building improvement costs. But...

Question: Where does the State of NY get the money to pay for their 70% share? Answer: From Taxes!

End results:

Tax payers of Jamesville-DeWitt will be paying higer taxes;

The School Superindendent gets to improve her resume;

the idea that the State should be responsible for education of children is reinforced; and

greater burden is placed on parents who send their kids to private schools.

Now, while you digest that information, lean back, take a deep breath and thank your lucky stars you don't have to pay taxes on every breath you take.

Respectfully,
Gerard LeBlond
AboutYourWealth.com and SellinfoProductsOnline.com

USA Is Not A Democracy

The founders of the United States of America had no interest in creating a democracy. In fact, they considered a democratic form of government as a form of tyranny by the majority.

While the senate and house of representatives decide whether bills will become law based on majority votes (these governmental organs thereby act like democracies), this country's form of government is best called a representative republic.

Now, if you want the federal government to work most efficiently and to protect your interests they can best do this by upholding the constitution.

And remember, the constitution of the United States of America was specifically designed to limit the powers of the government and protect the people from the government. So,

It's critically important that you vote for the best people for the various positions that come up for votes. And, if you don't honestly know the people on the ballot... if you don't know where they really stand on various issues... if you don't even know if they share your beliefs, philosophies and standards then...

The best thing to do is write in the name of someone you know that would do a great job for a given position. And,

If you can't think of anyone... write in your own name... thereby voting for yourself...

Yes, you can vote for yourself. There's nothing wrong with that. In fact,

Most, if not all people who get their names on ballots vote for themselves... so why don't you follow their good practices?

Here's a handy mantra you can borrow from me:

"When in doubt vote for yourself!"

"When in doubt voter for yourself!"

Or, if you don't think you would make a good candidate for the position, vote for your mother... or your dad or your spouse or your neighbor... but what-ever you do

Don't ever vote for someone that you don't really know.

Now, some of the readers of this report might vote for Joe Schmoo or Jane Doo-Daa because Joe Schmoo's and Jane Doo-Daa's names appear on the news, or between the covers of Parade Magazine, Time, Newsweek or the local news paper.

But do you really know the real Joe Schmoo or Jane Doo-Daa from these stories (many of those stories are almost word for word copy taken from press-releases sent to the media by Joe Schmoo's or Jane Doo-Daa's public relations staff)... do you really know the people or do you only know the image that the candidates want you to imagine that they are...

Admit it, voting for people because they are bigger celebrities than the "unknown" names on a ballot is a poor reason for voting for that person. So, what is a voter to do?

Vote for someone you know.

Vote for yourself if all else fails... but don't vote by closing your eyes and pulling a name out of a hat.

From Sell Info Products Online dot com (www.sellinfoproductsonline.com) this is LeBlond, Gerard LeBlond.

Now, go out and vote for yourself.

Vote Like A Politician

.

Hello:

This is LeBlond, Gerard LeBlond of West-Gate Press and Sell Info Products Online dot com and have you ever wondered who...

Bill Clinton voted for when he ran for Governor of Arkansas and for President of the United States of America? or...

George W. Bush voted for when he ran for Governor of Texas and for President of the United States of America? or...

Ronald Reagan voted for when he ran for Governor of California and for President of the United States of America? or...

John F. Kerry voted for when he ran for Senator of Massachusetts? or...

Olympia Snowe voted for when she ran for Senator of Maine? or...

Hillary Clinton voted for when she ran for Senator of New York? or...

Chuckie Schumer voted for when he ran for the Senate seat for the State of New York?

The answer in each and every one of the above cases...

They voted for themselves!

Think about that for a second.

Those people who are in high power voted for themselves.

Now...

Whether you are in a position of high power or not who says you can't vote for yourself?

Well, in many States, voters are allowed to vote for "write-in" candidates.

If you live in such a State and you don't know who to vote for...

Take my advice and...

Vote for yourself.

P.S. If you don't think you want to vote yourself into a "seat" then...

Vote for me (Gerard LeBlond) or...

Vote for your mother (assuming she's still alive and an American citizen) or any one else that you think is the best person for the job.