Along with inequality in wealth, politics is increasingly divided between a very small percentage who can afford access and the vast majority who are effectively marginalized. In 2014, billionaire Tom Perkins essentially proposed eliminating that last trace of fairness by arguing that one ought to be able to purchase as many votes as he or she could afford. Ostensibly, one million dollars would buy one million votes. Given the current state of inequality, we concur that "one person, one vote" is no longer sensible. However, following from the political philosophy of Pierre Proudhon, we take the position that "property is theft." Accordingly, the possession of wealth, far from being a source of increased rights, is exactly what disqualifies an individual from supernumerary votes. Instead, drawing upon Proudhon’s views, and those of other nineteenth-century anarchists, we argue that the poorest in society, those who have the least property and have therefore committed the least theft, ought to have a surplus of votes. Using anarchism as a framework for critique within the parameters of existing politics, we will argue that as wealth declines, individuals ought to be bestowed with additional votes as compensation.