Two-thirds of Republicans think voting is a privilege that can be limited.

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/07/22/wide-partisan-divide-on-whether-voting-is-a-fundamental-right-or-a-privilege-with-responsibilities/

As political battles continue around the nation over voting access and restrictions, a new Pew Research Center survey finds that a majority of Americans (57%) say voting is “a fundamental right for every adult U.S. citizen and should not be restricted in any way.”

Fewer (42%) express the view that “voting is a privilege that comes with responsibilities and can be limited if adult U.S. citizens don’t meet some requirements.”

Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents overwhelmingly say voting is a fundamental right that should not be restricted in any way – 78% hold this view, while fewer than a quarter (21%) say it is a privilege. Two-thirds of Republicans and Republican leaners say voting is a privilege that can be limited if requirements are not met, compared with about half as many (32%) who say it is a fundamental right.

The survey, conducted July 8-18, 2021, also finds a rare point of partisan agreement when it comes to the importance of all qualified citizens being allowed to vote. However, there are sizable differences in confidence about whether this is happening – and even wider differences in confidence in whether people not legally qualified to vote are prevented from voting.

*snip*

[Walleye]

1. I have heard right-wingers refer to voting is a privilege many times.Pisses me off

[TheBlackAdder]

23. With Republican leaning 'Constitutional Scholars' favoring restrictons by 67%. . .

.

Just points to two things: Ignorance & Hypocrisy.



.

[Mad_Machine76]

28. I really wonder why it isn't protected more in the Constitution

I know that States were given the freedom to basically set their own standards but it seems like they have way overbroad powers in that regard and can restrict way too much- and we're seeing how they are abusing it. I think that some minimum uniform standards need to be set (which I know S1 is trying to do). I still also don't get the logic or constitutionality of permanent or lengthy disenfranchisement of people convicted of felonies, for example.

[Walleye]

43. Yes. It took until 1965 to get the voting rights act. And now they've shredded that.

[ZonkerHarris]

2. Ask the same people if that limiting of rights also applies to gun ownership....

bet they say no then.

[Nevilledog]

4. But.....that's a God given right, dontchaknow

[Hortensis]

3. Appalling and frightening.

[lagomorph777]

18. Even more appalling, look at some of the responses right here in this thread.

[Hortensis]

20. Some do seem to have weak commitment to government of, by, and for...

[Dial H For Hero]

29. Please explain how simply acknowledging the fact that voting rights are sometimes limited

shows a lack of commitment.

[Hortensis]

41. It doesn't. Interjection of facts is a good thing. Fwiw,

generally speaking, lack of commitment could be shown, though not assumed, by unquestioning acceptance, not just by arguing in support.

The common practice of disenfranchisement of felons, accepted like a law of nature by many, is mostly driven by conservative contempt for representative government and for the rights of the "undeserving" in general. Not by liberals. Hard-core cons will disenfranchise anyone, sometimes including themselves, and are usually eagerly for it for others. Whatever the individual conclusion, agreeing with them, and with it their argument that voting's a privilege that can and should be taken away, should be questioned.

Btw, I believe every citizen's right to vote should be considered so sacred in a representative democracy (government of, by and for the people!) that very few crimes (conceivably none if enough people agreed) could be punished with disenfranchisement.

[Casady1]

5. Read the 15th amendment n/t

[DavidDvorkin]

25. There it is, in black and white on parchment.

[PoliticAverse]

32. I've read it. It implicitly implies the "right" to vote can be denied or abridged except...

"on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."

The purpose of the 15th Amendment was to protect "black suffrage". That's why it isn't worded simply like:
"The right of the people to vote shall not be infringed" - which would imply that no restrictions on voting were allowed.

[unblock]

6. Voting has "responsibilities" but, no responsibility to avoid infecting others during a pandemic

[Dial H For Hero]

7. In almost all states, felons cannot vote while in jail. Even after being released, most states

prohibit them from voting, some while they're on probation, some for the rest of their lives.

If asked, "Can voting be limited if adult U.S. citizens don't meet some requirements?" I would answer "yes".

[Zeitghost]

10. Rights can be limited

The Constitution allows for the rights of an individual to be violated/limited through Due Process. Some of those rights are limited temporarily, some permanently.

[keithbvadu2]

8. head-of-household voting

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215386399

https://americanindependent.com/mark-walker-north-carolina-senate-richard-burr-republicans-abby-johnson/

GOP Senate hopeful to campaign with far-right activist who says wives shouldn't vote

head-of-household voting

Johnson tweeted her thoughts about a voting system whereby the "head of household," generally assumed by those within right-wing and evangelical Christian circles to be a man, votes on behalf of everyone in his family,

[keithbvadu2]

9. The right to vote is not in the Constitution

https://theconversation.com/the-right-to-vote-is-not-in-the-constitution-144531

Explains that it was left up to the states.

[Orangepeel]

15. if the right cannot be abridged, it has to be a right, right?

How can there not be a right to vote if that right cannot be abridged on some account? The right has to exist first.


The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

[keithbvadu2]

21. "The right of citizens of the United States to vote" ... does not say it is a US Constitutional ri

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote" ...

does not say it is a US Constitutional right.

It allows for a state Constitutional right.

[keithbvadu2]

22. When arguing the Constitution on social media:

When arguing the Constitution on social media:

1. Whatever is not specifically allowed must be forbidden.
IF this logic supports your premise.

2. Whatever is not specifically forbidden must be allowed.
IF this logic supports your premise.

[lagomorph777]

33. Whaaat?

Wow, that's right-wing stuff.

"Amendment XIV

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."


"Amendment XV
Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

Amendment 17 - Senators Elected by Popular Vote. Ratified 4/8/1913.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most
numerous branch of the State legislatures.

Amendment 19 - Women's Suffrage. Ratified 8/18/1920.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Amendment 23 - Presidential Vote for District of Columbia. Ratified 3/29/1961.
Amendment 26 - Voting Age Set to 18 Years. Ratified 7/1/1971.

1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age."

"Yes, There Is A Right To Vote In The Constitution

Tom Donnelly | September 18, 2012

One constitutional argument that’s always confused us around here at Constitutional Accountability Center is the claim that there’s no right to vote in the Constitution – a claim even made by some of our progressive friends. In a recent piece in the Atlantic, Professor Garrett Epps explains the origins of this claim and offers an extensive (and persuasive) rebuttal. It’s well worth a read.

As Professor Epps makes clear, not only is there a right to vote in the Constitution, but it’s the single right that appears most often in the Constitution’s text – five times in all. In fact, four separate Amendments – the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th – even use the same powerful language to protect it: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged . . . .” Of course, like every other constitutional right, the right to vote is subject to reasonable restrictions. Nevertheless, it’s just as much a constitutional right as any other embodied in our Constitution.

Check out Professor Epps’s piece for yourself. It’s a great way to continue to reflect on one of our most cherished constitutional rights in honor of the Constitution’s 225th anniversary."

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/09/voting-right-or-privilege/262511/
Which constitutional right is the most important? You might answer "freedom of speech" or "free exercise" of religion. Some think it's "the right to keep and bear arms." Criminal lawyers think of the guarantee against "unreasonable searches and seizures," trial lawyers of jury trial in civil cases.

But which right appears most often in the Constitution's text?

It's "the right to vote."

[keithbvadu2]

38. See my post 21

I am far, far from right wing.

[lagomorph777]

40. Yikes. How does "The right of citizens of the United States to vote" ...

IN the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, not explicitly mean a UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT?

Holy moly that's some pretzel logic.

[keithbvadu2]

44. The US Constitution recognizes the right to vote but does not set the right to vote.

We've gotten off track. The discussion is/was/is limitations on voting and who can or cannot set them. The US Constitution recognizes the right to vote but does not set the right to vote. The states set the limitations on the right to vote. The right to vote can be different between states such as the limitations on felons voting who have served their time..

Some of these limitations have been addressed in later changes such as race, religion, gender, age.

[pandr32]

11. Hmm-mm, I bet they'd feel differently if their votes were threatened.

The Republicans, that is.

[Hortensis]

19. Their votes ARE threatened. This is all about divide and conquer,

the goal to limit the electorate's ability to control the RWers who intend to take over the government.

Many are RW authoritarians by nature, longing for leaders to free them of the responsibilities of decisionmaking, and are fine with it. That's a big part of what's so horrifying.

[lagomorph777]

12. Three thirds of Reptilians are flaming evil assholes.

[lagomorph777]

13. Wow. I see multiple posts right here in this thread that agree.

That is shocking and disappointing.

[Dial H For Hero]

24. Why is acknowledging that fact that voting rights can be limited "shocking and disappointing"?

[lagomorph777]

30. When do you think it's OK to limit voting rights?

[Dial H For Hero]

31. That's a different question. I'll answer it, though.

I believe that felons shoould lose the right to vote while they're in prison.

[11 Bravo]

34. Should Charlie Manson be allowed to vote?

[lagomorph777]

35. Dead people are not allowed to vote, though Republicans try it fairly regularly.

They always get caught.

[11 Bravo]

36. My bad. Should he have been allowed to vote while incarcerated?

[lagomorph777]

37. Most rights are revoked while incarcerated.

However, I have no objection to people in jail voting. Many are there due to the war on drugs or other Trumped-up reasons; it is not my place to decide which are legitimate and which are illegitimate incarcerations. Basically, the war on drugs was created to jail brown and black people and remove their voting rights, i.e. a violation of the 15th Amendment.

[11 Bravo]

39. Be that as it may, as per the OP, 2/3 of Republicans are correct (there's a first).

For better or for worse, citizens may be disenfranchised.

[Boomerproud]

14. One person. One vote.

End of story. It is law.

[sinkingfeeling]

16. But carrying around a loaded gun is a right!

[Dial H For Hero]

27. Which can also be limited.

[Ms. Toad]

17. Poorly worded (compound) question

It is unclear whether those who chose privilege did so because they believe it is a privilege - OR - because they believe it comes with responsibilities and can. Similarly - it is unclear whether those who chose fundamental right did so because they believe it is a fundamental right - OR - because they believe fundamental rights should not be restricted.

There is also the discrepancy in the second phrase in each. One is worded "should not be" which reads as a question of policy, and the other is factual "can be limited"

I'm disappointed that Pew Research would use such a poor question.

[Dial H For Hero]

26. Completely agree. The answer to a poll question shouldn't require a paragraph to answer.

[David__77]

42. If you want to ban voting for prisoners you want to restrict it.

I think a majority probably opposes unlimited adult citizen voting rights.

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. and 74% of "conservative" Republicans think that

Which means when they think of what they wish to conserve, it's the pre-constitution form of restricted voting. Most would think that's taking 'conservatism' rather too far.