President Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson was probably one of the most gifted of the American Presidents and wrote the constitution at the age of 33 whilst a Delegate to the Second Continental Congress. With a distinguished CV he became President at the age of 57.
In the 1960’s President John F. Kennedy held a dinner in the White House for a group of the brightest minds in the nation and made this statement: “This is perhaps the assembly of the most intelligence ever to gather at one time in the White House with the exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.”
Relevant Thomas Jefferson quotes.
“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”
“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”
“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”
“To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”
The Right to Vote
It is only since 1928 when all persons over the age of 21 years in the UK obtained the right to vote in general elections, referred to as universal franchise. The right for women to vote achieved by the Suffragette Movement was the last major battle in that cause.
Before that there were restrictions on who could vote, usually according to wealth and land holding. It was always argued that the ‘ordinary’ people didn’t have the intelligence or education to be able to make a reasoned choice.
This universal franchise worked quite well from 1928 to 1949 because the people then had the choice to support a party that would champion better conditions for the working class, whilst higher class people could vote for a party that supported business and banking and the wealth creators.
Introduction of the Welfare State
It all changed in 1949 with the advent of the welfare state. Now there was unemployment benefit, sick pay, and the National Health Service free at the point of use to all. Now any political party that offered the greatest benefits would achieve the most votes.
The problem with this, as some of the population are now aware, is that the benefits of the NHS and welfare state have been ramped up so much by political parties eager to win elections that it has gone past the point of being affordable.
Left wing supporters of the Greens, the Liberals, and Labour are still baying for ever more to be spent on the NHS, demanding a higher minimum wage and more workers benefits even though this means higher taxation and unaffordable costs to indigenous manufacturers.
Worst of all there are a huge number of people in the UK who are dependent upon unemployment benefits and other government aid and have the right to vote. Why I say that is because they will always vote for a party that offers them more, which is bad for the country as a whole.
Voting reform
Maybe it is time to change the rules, like the changes presently being floated with regard to immigrant benefits. I believe that to qualify to vote you should be naturalised as British, have a National Insurance Number, and pay tax, or do voluntary or community service on a regular or permanent basis. There should be no vote unless a person contributes to the country, no free rides for men or women.
This would be incentive to work as an alternative to a life, or many years on benefits. Making a vote something that has to be earned by working also encourages low unemployment. It also reduces the political impact from those who only wish to sponge off the state and not contribute to the gross national income.
Young people going into work straight from school would be able to vote within 6 months of starting work whilst those who go to university and not paying taxes will have to wait until they get a job post university. This in itself will give incentive to vocational studies and work as a real alternative to university.
If you are indigenous you must be employed and have paid national insurance and tax for the whole of six months prior to voting date, or for the self employed the submission of tax returns together with tax payments due on 31st January and 31st July. New businesses could submit a first six months account to qualify like employed persons.
Those drawing an old age pension and those who have worked and paid taxes for many years and then retired living on their own means would retain the right for life. Those who served a full term of at least five years in the military or had received a life changing injury during service would earn the right for life.
Making the vote conditional makes it something worth working for and is more likely to encourage that right to be exercised.
I’m afraid that such a system would create a huge bureaucracy with decisions endlessly subject to criticism and appeals, be massively expensive and time-consuming, and create more bitter, divisive controversy than the campaigns for universal suffrage ever did.
Prisoners should never have a vote: having breached the civil code which protects the right to life, well being and property, they lose their right to freedom and the vote. Foreign nationals cannot vote.
It is much simpler for everyone else to have the right to vote, which they can exercise or not. Many people do not bother, either because they don’t care or don’t understand politics, but it doesn’t really matter. Those who do attend the polling booth, influence matters to a greater or lesser degree (the recent referendum is a magnificent example of the greater degree) and ultimately get their way in how things should be run. That’s fine and fair: the ones who take the trouble to participate in the democratic process should be the ones who benefit.
Disenfranchisement would be a retrograde step. In a democracy everyone has the right and the duty to vote: it’s not a privilege, but a tool to enable us to elect our legislators. If you don’t fulfil your duty to vote, don’t complain afterwards.
I agree with Paul Icini: our electoral system does need reform, first in the matter of first past the post, which leaves too many people unrepresented; second, in the matter of postal votes, which are open to abuse and corrupt practices, leaving us little better than some 3rd world banana republic.
Anthony,
All common sense, but unfortunately the lefties, the scroungers and those who are simply misguided and have yet to witness reality would ruin the chances of election for any party with such a policy.
Yet for the Asian and African immigrants that is how it is for us and many of them in their own countries so why do they expect to be treated differently here?
Treat them as they would treat us or better still, simply close the door to them.
Paul, I am not supporting permanent disenfranchisement. Anyone wishing to earn the right to vote must contribute to the system, that’s all. A life on benefits does not qualify you. Being a foreign national does not qualify you. Its simply within the power of the person to qualify.
To remove the right to vote from convicted prisoners is one thing but I think maybe this is in danger of becoming rather too close to an attempt to tweak the voting system into removing far left wing electors. We may not like them, but they are entitled to democracy too. It’s the sort of attempt to alter the system in their own favour the old parties would implement like a shot it they thought could get away with it.
Disenfranchising people is a dangerous road to follow and sets a precedent. To concentrate on changing FPTP would be a better plan.
Michael, I disagree. Giving a first vote and then having to earn a second defeats the object of the exercise. Most wouldn’t work to earn the right and the rest would obtain it by default just by working and contributing. It has to be on a basis of exclusion, if you are not naturalised, if you don’t have a National insurance Number, if you haven’t paid tax and NI or done qualifying voluntary work in the community in the 6 months preceding a vote, if you are on unemployment benefit you don’t qualify.
My Favourite presidential quote is:
Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.
— John F. Kennedy, inauguration address, January 1961.
UKIP should use this quote – it says everything that needs to be said to spongers really.
Superb article! You’ve said what I’ve been thinking for years, but not known quite how to say. Acting on this might be challenging though. Perhaps giving a second vote to those who qualify for it might work or even raising the voting age as a first step. Talking of which, being a foster carer I’m aware that voter registration now seems to start in the year in which a child turns 16 which suggests that people currently running (ruining?) our country have a contrary view on this.