19) Analysis of the government policy of ""Extending Voting Rights to Criminals"

 SPOTM Analysis of “Fully Extending Voting Rights to Criminals and Non-Citizens”

Verdict: Strongly Misaligned

Fully extending voting rights to criminals (including those in prison or with serious convictions) and non-citizens is a radical big-government and anti-sovereignty policy that undermines the integrity of democratic self-government. SPOTM views it as deeply misaligned with the principles of citizenship, the rule of law, individual responsibility, and the constitutional foundation of the republic.

Why This Policy Is Misaligned

1. Non-Citizens Voting

• Voting is a core privilege and duty of citizenship, not a universal human right. Non-citizens owe allegiance to their home countries and are not part of the sovereign body politic that creates and sustains the U.S. Constitution.
• Allowing non-citizens to vote dilutes the political power of citizens and violates the principle of self-government by the people. It effectively lets outsiders influence the laws and policies of a nation they are not members of.
• Historical and constitutional tradition restricts voting to citizens. Expanding it to non-citizens erodes national sovereignty and the social contract.

2. Criminals Voting (Especially While Incarcerated)

• Serious criminals have violated the social contract and the rights of others. Forfeiture of certain civil rights (including voting) has long been a consequence of serious crimes in American and Western tradition.
• Allowing prisoners or convicted felons to vote from behind bars gives political power to those who have demonstrated disregard for the rule of law. This distorts democratic outcomes and undermines the moral foundation of self-government.
• SPOTM emphasizes personal responsibility. Those who commit serious crimes against the community should face meaningful consequences, including temporary or permanent loss of voting privileges in many cases.

3. Broader Philosophical Problems

• This policy treats voting as an unlimited entitlement rather than a responsibility tied to citizenship and lawful conduct.
• It expands government power by fundamentally altering the electorate without broad constitutional consensus.
• It risks turning elections into tools for non-citizens or criminal interests rather than expressions of the will of the citizen body.

SPOTM’s Recommended Approach

SPOTM supports a citizen-centered, responsibility-based franchise:

• Voting Rights Reserved for Citizens: Only U.S. citizens should vote in federal, state, and local elections.
• Criminal Disenfranchisement: Serious felons should face temporary or permanent loss of voting rights, with restoration possible only after demonstrating rehabilitation and completion of sentences (in line with many states’ current practices).
• Strict Voter Integrity: Voter ID, citizenship verification, and clean voter rolls are essential to protect the integrity of elections.
• Focus on Assimilation and Responsibility: Immigrants should pursue legal citizenship through proper channels before gaining voting rights.

SPOTM Summary Statement:

“Fully extending voting rights to criminals and non-citizens is a profoundly misaligned policy that erodes citizenship, the rule of law, and the integrity of self-government. SPOTM supports voting as a privilege of citizenship tied to lawful conduct and personal responsibility — not as an unlimited entitlement that includes non-citizens or those who have seriously violated the social contract.”

This position flows directly from SPOTM’s commitment to limited government, constitutional order, individual responsibility, sovereignty, and the preservation of a rights-protecting republic for its citizens.

In addition:

Here’s more information on extending voting rights to criminals and non-citizens from a SPOTM perspective.

Felon Voting Rights (Criminals)

• Current U.S. Practice: Varies by state. Some states restore rights automatically upon release; others require completion of sentence plus probation/parole; a few permanently disenfranchise certain felons. Maine and Vermont allow voting even from prison.
• Historical Tradition: For most of U.S. history, serious criminals lost voting rights as part of civil death or forfeiture. This was seen as a logical consequence of violating the social contract.
• SPOTM View: Serious crimes (especially violent or repeated offenses) demonstrate unfitness for full participation in self-government. SPOTM supports reasonable, temporary disenfranchisement for serious felons, with restoration possible after rehabilitation and sentence completion. Blanket restoration, especially while incarcerated, undermines deterrence and the moral weight of the law.

Non-Citizen Voting

• Current Practice: Federal elections are restricted to citizens. Some localities (e.g., certain cities in Maryland, California, and New York proposals) have experimented with non-citizen voting in local elections (school board, municipal).
• Arguments Against: Non-citizens lack the full stake in the nation’s future. Allowing them to vote dilutes citizen sovereignty and creates incentives for politicians to cater to non-citizen interests over citizens.
• SPOTM View: Voting is a privilege of citizenship. Extending it to non-citizens — even locally — erodes the distinction between citizen and outsider and risks foreign influence or demographic manipulation. SPOTM strongly opposes it at any level.

Broader SPOTM Principles on the Franchise

• Voting should be tied to citizenship + responsibility.
• The electorate should consist of those with a genuine, long-term stake in the republic’s success.
• Expanding the franchise to those who have broken serious laws or who are not members of the political community weakens democratic legitimacy and the rule of law.
• SPOTM favors strict voter integrity measures (citizenship verification, ID requirements) to protect the integrity of elections.

SPOTM Summary:

“Fully extending voting rights to criminals and non-citizens is misaligned because it severs the link between citizenship, responsibility, and self-government. SPOTM supports voting as a privilege reserved for citizens who have not forfeited it through serious crime — not as an entitlement for non-citizens or active lawbreakers.”

This aligns with SPOTM’s commitment to ordered liberty, the rule of law, sovereignty, and a responsible citizenry.