That's why it's usually a good idea to read an article beyond the first paragraph. If you had, you'd realize that the purpose of the first paragraph is to lay out a popular liberal view that the author later argues against.
Skimming the piece, I didn’t see where the author later refutes that initial bogosity in any way. It doesn’t address economic reasons for voting, thereby dealing with that first ignorant salvo—it focuses mainly on morality and psycho-social dynamics as far as I can tell.
But if I’m wrong, and you wish to point out where in the article that first assertion is “argued against,” please do so.