What one politician had to say why North Dakota could not make a payment to its citizens like Alaska does: The constitutional language in North Dakota that prohibits a direct payment to residents is found in Article X, Section 18, in which it states that the state cannot “loan or give its credit or make donations to or in aid of any individual, association or corporation except for reasonable support of the poor.” My Response: What is being talked about here is not a loan, it is not credit to the citizens, It is not a donation to or done in aid of any individual, association or corporation. It is to be a disbursement out of a fund in equal amounts to all residents within a states boundaries regardless of their financial stature. The disbursement would not discriminate against private landowners that have any where from one to who knows how many oil wells on their property. It would not discriminate against business owners, legislators, rent gougers and you all know who you are. The concept of the idea is nothing more than a payment or disbursement for being a citizen and putting up with the higher cost of living through increased rental costs, inflated property costs and increased costs of products ranging from Food to hardware to luxury items. The payments would be a standard figure regardless of your geographical location with in the state or financial status. Every one would get the same across the board. I do not see where that can be construed as a loan, giving credit or donating. Legislative personnel are twisting the words to keep the money in the state coffer to fund any little whim they might have for their respective districts. The fund would not or should not be wiped out each year. I am going to quit here before I step over the line. Politicians manipulating the people they were elected to represent instead of representing them just makes me sick.
Posted on: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 22:03:42 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015