Over at Wise Bread, Paul Michael asks, “Would You Sell Your Vote?”

I wouldn’t actually sell my vote, but if someone offered me money to vote for them, it would only be my own convictions against lying that would keep me from a.) taking their cash and b.) voting for the other guy, since the vote buyer obviously can’t be trusted. That’s one of the things I don’t understand about straightforward vote buying. If someone is unprincipled enough to take money to vote a certain way, why would anyone expect them to be principled enough to tell the truth about how they voted? If John Doe gives Jim cash to vote for him, what guarantee does John have that Jim actually did vote for him?

That’s why the more traditional version of vote buying works so well. Instead of offering cash to individuals to (maybe) get their vote, politicians have learned another tactic. They don’t offer money to individuals in exchange for individual votes — they offer money to a class of people in a ploy to get enough votes from that class to win the elections.

I see no ethical difference between Jim voting for John just because John handed him a hundred dollar bill and Jim voting for John because John has promised a subsidy that’ll give him several hundred bucks. If a person on welfare votes for the candidate who has promised to extend or increase his benefits, has he sold his vote? If a businessman who makes $150,000 a year votes for the candidate who has promised to cut taxes, has he sold his vote? What about the reverse? What if an investor votes for a candidate because the candidate’s opponent has promised to punitively tax profits on a company the investor has stock in, or a retiree dependent upon his Social Security votes against the man who wants to slow the benefits’ increase? Are these situations equivalent to vote selling? I can’t see any substantial reason why they aren’t.

So, how do we prevent vote buying? If there’s no ethical difference between voting because someone handed you cash to vote and voting because the candidate in question supports a policy that would give you cash, I don’t honestly think we can. We can’t stop people from voting for their own benefit. We can’t even prove they’ve done so. How do you separate those who vote a certain way because the vote benefits them personally from those who vote a certain way because they genuinely believe in the principles behind the policy (and the fact that it benefits them personally is irrelevant to them)?

Should we simply drop all laws against vote buying, and hope that people’s disgust with the slimy characters who most often engage in such outright behavior will keep the activity in check? I don’t think so, but I’m not sure that the current solution is the best one either. It’s just something to think about.