Civil Candor

political cynicism for turbulent times

Copyright © 2022 CivilCandor.com

Home » Government Ethics » Should Tax Plan Deny Voting Rights to Welfare Recipients?

Should Tax Plan Deny Voting Rights to Welfare Recipients?

Last update July 15, 2013Leave a Comment

Who would have thought that our president and the Founding Fathers have so much in common? Barack Obama’s call to elevate the wealthiest Americans above the herd by asking them to do more than their fair share reeks of elitism and demands that the rich receive something extra in return for shouldering the country’s burdens. Should their votes count for more? Should Congress deny voting rights to welfare recipients and others who contribute less than their fair share?

Do Americans vote for themselves or the common good?

What are we thinking when we cast our votes? If the purpose of a career in politics is to advocate for the good of the country, then our role as voters is to select leaders who will do exactly that. How many Americans confuse the common good with their own wants and needs, inviting government to step in and take control?

Politicians can be masters at twisting the common good. The president is demanding a greater share of higher incomes to support government spending, a tax plan that is most saleable to voters who contribute the least. Does the common good require us to take money from the top and redistribute it as giveaways and entitlements for the have nots who vote for promises made by Democrats?

Obama tax plan demands wealthiest Americans be held to a higher standard.

The White House has done an exemplary job of misinforming the public about the ethics of the Obama tax plan. In the president’s vision of America the wealthiest Americans have abdicated their responsibility to the middle class:

Unfortunately, it appears that Republicans in Congress have decided that instead of compromising – instead of asking anything of the wealthiest Americans – they would rather let these cuts fall squarely on the middle class.¹

The Obama tax plan expects the rich to do more:

It’s got tough cuts, tough reforms, and asks more of the wealthiest Americans.²

The Founding Fathers also expected more from the wealthy. They chose to deny voting rights to those who didn’t own property.

Did the Founding Fathers get it right by restricting voting rights?

The vote was once restricted to male property owners. Women cast their votes for the first time in 1920 after a fight in which the loudest voices demanding we deny voting rights to women belonged to Democrats.

If earning more means accepting the responsibility to rescue the poor and raise the middle class then your vote should count for more. This begs the question of the value of votes cast by welfare recipients. Are their voting rights a conflict of interest that is injurious to the common good when we can least afford to foot the bill for social insurance?

Is voting or holding political office the worst conflict of interest?

The common good is incompatible with a tax plan sold to the public with promises of continued federal giveaways and the lure of dependence on big government. The recession gave Democrats the opportunity to try to turn the country away from free market capitalism to an economy where government determines our needs and redistributes incomes and tax dollars accordingly, an America where those most in need vote for giveaways, not leaders.

Is voting against the common good in hopes of personal gain a worse conflict of interest than holding political office and backing a tax plan that will further injure the economy, but represents the Democratic Party’s best chances for longevity?

Is denying voting rights to welfare recipients the answer?

It is if it keeps Democrats out of office. They are unable to say no to giveaways and social spending and are currently focused on a plan to hand citizenship to illegal immigrants, a foolhardy scheme that will lead to all manner of irresponsible spending in hopes of a groundswell of support.

Were the Founding Fathers on to something when they made sure that only those with property and money to lose could vote? They tried to ensure that our government did not fall into the trap we find ourselves in now, with a president who throws cake to the masses in exchange for popular support that helps ensure Democrats will lead long, damaging careers in public office.

Is denying voting rights to welfare recipients or weighting ballots based on income the answer? Welfare recipients are a small percentage of eligible voters, but as demands for relief expand a growing portion of the electorate will be given a reason to elect politicians who will continue to forsake the common good in exchange for votes.

References

Filed Under: Government Ethics Tagged With: middle class

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Apotheosis of Washington. Architect of the Capitol.

Apotheosis of Washington
Architect of the Capitol

BROWSE

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Read More

In case of sale of your personal information, you may opt out by using the link Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Accept Decline Cookie Settings
I consent to the use of following cookies:
Cookie Declaration About Cookies
Necessary (1) Marketing (0) Analytics (1) Preferences (0) Unclassified (1)
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
NameDomainPurposeExpiryType
wpl_user_preference civilcandor.com WP GDPR Cookie Consent Preferences 1 year HTTP
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.
We do not use cookies of this type.
Analytics cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
NameDomainPurposeExpiryType
_ga civilcandor.com Google Universal Analytics long-time unique user tracking identifier. 2 years HTTP
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
We do not use cookies of this type.
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
NameDomainPurposeExpiryType
_ga_R6V41C7WZK civilcandor.com --- 2 years ---
Cookies are small text files that can be used by websites to make a user's experience more efficient. The law states that we can store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies we need your permission. This site uses different types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third party services that appear on our pages.
Cookie Settings

Do you really wish to opt-out?