Thats absurd.
On its face it might seem absurd, but it is not out of the norm in the United States to give more weight in terms of votes to those who offer more.
At our very founding, larger states (arguably the more important states) were not satisfied with the concept of one state one vote. The Connecticut Compromise obviously solved this problem, but still, look at the structure of the House of Representatives, states are not represented equally, but rather proportionally by the size of their population (and arguably then by their importance).
I would not support the concept of disallowing people to vote, but I don't think the argument to do so is absurd off the bat.