[lawgolfer]

I am not questioning the right of non-taxpayers to vote. I am questioning the wisdom of having 40% of the citizenry pay nothing in income tax. Many of this 40%, as well as many of the 60% paying income taxes, will not vote in any event. My point is that citizens who pay income taxes are more likely to vote and to consider the issues on which they vote and the platforms of the candidates they have to choose among.

As I recall, only property owners could vote in the school board elections in the rural districts in Illinois. However, many of the owners had tenants who farmed their land and many of the tenants as well as owners farming their own land had one or more "hired men'. The tenants and the hired men lived on the farms and had families. Providing decent schools for the children was a serious obligation. The men and women who were elected to the school boards took this obligation seriously and were proud of their school. I admit I view those times through rose-colored lens; however, I know from personal experience that those schools were a prime example of the benefits of an involved citizenry.

With the increased mechanization of farming and the consolidation of small farms into large ones, the rural population rapidly diminished in the 1950's. This, together with the increase in supervision of all schools by the state resulted in the consolidation of the schools into area-wide districts.