Taxpayer-Funded Freebies
Posted by Caleb O. Brown on February 6th, 2008 in law, liberty, policy, pork |
David Adams of the Bluegrass Institute, in opposing a bill to restore voting rights for ex-cons, says that “we hardly need to expand the base of voters electing themselves bigger entitlements from taxpayers.”
Skeptical Cat is fraught with skepticism. After all, if the main objection to restoring voting rights to folks who have done their time is that they might vote for candidates promising free goodies, then would David endorse repealing voting rights for Medicaid and food stamp recipients, state workers (retired and otherwise), public school teachers, members of the military, overtaxed entrepreneurs, mooching war widows or anyone else likely to vote for politicians promising taxpayer-funded freebies?
The problem is that wanting to deny ex-cons the right to vote because they might vote for free stuff doesn’t separate ex-cons from, well, anyone.
Currently, state workers may take a half day so that they have time to vote. I’ve been in favor of the following deal for them: Give state workers a full day off (which they may use at any time) and $500 … if they pledge not to vote.
2 Responses
Reductio ad absurdum can be fun — and sometimes quite profitable — but in this case I’m not sure why you went to the trouble.
It’s only absurd to want to deny people the right to vote because they’ll vote themselves free stuff if you believe that people who regularly vote themselves free stuff right now should be legally allowed to continue to do so.
You appear to believe otherwise. If you have some other reason for wanting ex-cons to remain disenfranchised from the voting process, then say it aloud.
If you believe that one group of people who might vote themselves free stuff (ex cons) shouldn’t be allowed to vote, then what about the people who can be counted on to vote for the promise of free stuff year in and year out? Do you think that their right to vote should be based upon some measure of their propensity to vote for taxpayer-funded freebies?
The idea of such a rule isn’t radical, but its merits can be debated. There was a time in this country when only property owners could vote. In Utah, for example, only taxpayers were allowed to vote for a time.
These kinds of rules aren’t absurd. They’re just wrong.