>Here's something simpler: Look at your previous year Federal tax return. If it shows that you paid even $1 in taxes, you get a vote in Federal elections.
>Simple enough? Or would that still give too much representation to "the wealthy"?
No, but then again it's not substantially different to what we already have, so I don't see the point.
According to one article, 46% of US households didn't pay any Federal income taxes in 2011.[1]
That was the observation that got Romney in trouble. If those people weren't voting, that would be a very substantially different to what we have now. E.g. quite likely Romney would be president. (Let's not debate if Romney would have done better than Obama. Too much of a tangent.)
You're absolutely right about the "quotation marks". :) I went way overboard. Please accept an upvote as an apology.
Edit: I forgot that, to a considerable minority of people, Romney and Obama aren't substantially different. It's easy to think Republican vs Democrat is the entirety of the political spectrum, but it's not.
No, but then again it's not substantially different to what we already have, so I don't see the point.
WTF is up with your quotation marks anyway?