Zero Liability Voters

Andrew Wilkow and the Zero Liability Voter; Some time back, I was listening to The  Wilkow Majority show on Sirius XM,** Andrew Wilkow coined a very interesting term, or so I thought. That term was, Zero Liability Voter. The next day, I called in to the show to chat him up about it. Turns out gentle reader, your favorite author has been obviously living under a rock for some time now. Mr Wilkow said he’s been using the term for decades. Although I am definitely late to the party on this one, I can easily see that not only is the term brilliant, but it also addresses what I see as a huge question of political morality.

I had been struggling for quite some time for a useable term that succinctly points out some of the flat out, immoral aspects of how we currently manage the sovereign franchise in these United States. Recently, that struggle again reared its head during an online discussion with a long time friend and Army buddy of mine. First of all, this guy is no leftist. He is a West Point graduate who built a successful business and life here in these United States. He was able to do that by learning in life’s school of hard knocks by spending the majority of his youth traveling in countries south of the rio Grande and growing up in the barrios of Los Angeles.

Since we are usually pretty much aligned on most issues of the day, I was somewhat surprised to find us in disagreement on my perception of the Framers’ intent on voting franchise in these United States. I’m not going to get into the back and forth, but the way I see it, decades of repetition of terms and phrases such as, “democracy,” “right to vote” and “one man, one vote,” have distorted the original intent of the Framers. As is clear in the document they drafted and had ratified by the states, severally and further subject to certain later amendments, there is no general, individual, right to vote in a Federal election.

Furthermore, the Framers were very clear that is was the states severally who would determine, once again, subject to later amendments, just who would be entitled to exercise the sovereign franchise. Before we go any further, I wish to make it clear that in no shape, form or fashion, am I promoting any schema that would prevent any U.S. citizen from voting based on their melanin content, bathroom preference, marital choice, religion or any other made up excuse Democrats have used in the past to prevent minorities, especially Blacks, from voting.

This is a discussion about civics. It’s a discussion about civil rights and civic duty. To have that discussion, we should start with the two major reasons we broke away from Fat George and his British Empire: Taxation and the “Divine Right of Kings” to carry our sons (and now daughters) off to war without our say so. Those two raisons d’être, for the American Revolution, are why all legislation regarding revenues (taxes) must originate in the House of Representatives and that Congress (both houses) is required to take us into a war.

That brings us back to Wilkow’s, Zero Liability Voter. His discussion back then, took place around the latest Federal stimulus package and the next one being proposed. Wilkow pointed out that although both packages were mostly made up of stuff totally unrelated to Covid relief, the Zero Liability Voters wouldn’t care, as long as they got their little pittance. The Zero Liability Voters don’t care about the cost, as they don’t pay Federal Income Tax. They have no fiduciary liability for the cost of their vote. That was Wilkow’s take.

Here’s mine. These voters, the most reliable part of the Democrat base, don’t care about debt being incurred on the necks of our grandchildren, as a good many of them have been on the public dole over generations. Their grandchildren won’t be paying. Mine will. Democrats have long taken advantage of that, to the detriment of the fiscal well being of these United States. That in turn, takes us back to the vision of the Framers.

The Framers believed that the people deciding the fate of this country on a day to day basis, ought to have some skin in the game. Those who do not, yet are able to participate in deciding how the Treasury spends funds provided by other citizens, become in thee words of Andrew Wilkow, Zero Liability Voters. They order all the expensive stuff off the menu, yet are nowhere to be seen when the waiter presents the bill. I find it morally indefensible that those who provide no contribution to the kitty are allowed such a voice in deciding how the money is spent. That needs to change. Some might ask, “But what abut those who have put themselves in Harm’s Way defending this country?” The answer to that is for another time. Stay tuned.

**Andrew Wilkow can be found on Patriot Channel 125, Sirius XM, M-F 1200-1500 EST

© Mike Ford Analytics 2023

If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at

Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA


7 thoughts on “Zero Liability Voters”

  1. Mike,
    Wilkow has spoken of the “zero liability voter” for many years. This is one of the many reasons I’m in favor of the “Fair Tax”, everyone pays, so everyone has skin in the game.


  2. I agree 100% that those given a franchise to vote should have skin in the game. Unfortunately, these ideas were used in the past to block certain demographics from voting, so it is difficult to discuss such a concept without being decried as some sort of “ist.” I would like to see some ideas for reducing or eliminating zero liability votes. Any suggestions?

    As for those who served their country in uniform (sorry, government “service” outside the military is not “service” and doesn’t count in my book), Robert Heinlein had the right idea in Starship Trooper. The franchise must be earned and re-earned over time by each generation.

  3. At the very least, the right to vote should be tied to a person filing a federal income tax form. Over and over, the Founders warned about things, like the ability to buy votes, and the politician brings home the bacon to do exactly that.
    The left keeps the plantation going, in every city that has been controlled by them, because they are useful idiots, and that term doesn’t break down into any area, other than lack of work ethic and moral responsibility. I’m not saying they shouldn’t have certain rights, but voting is not a right, but a responsibility to those who contribute to society, by feeding those who don’t through paying taxes.
    When you can vote to get more welfare, the lure is too great to let the politician become your master.
    The benefit of LBJ’s Great Society was to enslave the lower income scale of Americans, all for the sake of the Democrat master. Thomas Sowell wrote a book on the subject, and has made more than one video showing the evidence of that.
    Zero Liability Voter was the product of LBJ’s answer to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when the Great Society was passed. Before that time the societal problems were miniscule compared to after.
    The Great Society was the wrecking ball against morality, religion and decency. It also affected all the charitable institutions that previously fed those in the inner cities.
    I’d say it created the Zero Quality Voter, since all it did was put more on the leftist plantation, which is what a war was fought to break up, once before. Makes one wonder who actually won that war, doesn’t it?

    • Mr Berwind wrote:

      At the very least, the right to vote should be tied to a person filing a federal income tax form.

      The Framers tried to prevent such a thing, and the original Constitution required that direct federal taxes be apportioned on the basis of population, not income. The Sixteenth Amendment was the worst mischief ever foisted upon a free people.

      We should repeal the Sixteenth Amendment, and everybody should pay the same in tax. No, not the same percentage of income, but the same dollar amount!

Leave a Comment