You’re not aware that Allesan is Israeli? I think he has dual citizenship, but I don’t think he went to HS in the US, and we shoudn’t assume that everyone posting here did.
Not that I agree with him, but let’s keep in mind that we’re not all Americans here.
I’m sure it is merely coincidence that this policy regarding formerly incarcerated felons just happens to be much more stringently supported by Republicans, and that it happens to disenfranchise black people far out of proportion to their numbers.
I have no problem with disenfranchising felons (as I’ve explicitly stated in this thread) but I feel that’s a rare exception.
You would be right, if keeping felons from voting was uniquely American. Kinda like voter ID. It’s pretty close to universal around the world, but somehow when it’s done here it’s partisan. It’s the LACK of voter ID that is partisan.
Are you sure about that? I know felons (and the incarcerated) can vote in Canada. And a quick look at Wikipedia shows that plenty of other countries allow felons/incarcerated to vote.
It’s hardly universal but the stricter American states seem out of step from other first world countries on this issue.
I meant to say that voter ID was nearly universal, not felons being barred from voting. But it is perfectly normal for felons to be barred from voting, even where there is no partisan advantage in doing so.
Look, man, conviction does not settle the question of whether one is a good person. In the U.S. we have world’s the highest incarcerated population relative to the general population. And it is not because Americans are worse or less law-abiding than foreigners. And that’s rather a lot of citizens to disfranchise.
Actually, it’s mostly because Americans are worse than foreigners. We had an incredibly high violent crime rate by world standards until we put all the felons away rather than just letting them walk the street with rap sheets a mile long.
Looking at my posts, I see I’ve been unclear on something. When I say I support disenfranchising felons, I’m talking about those who are currently serving a sentence of imprisonment. Once their sentence is complete and they return to society (even if it’s on parole or probationary status) I feel they should be allowed to vote again.
I’d be for that, but only when their full debt to society is paid, which means completion of parole or probation. A felon fresh out of prison is fairly likely to commit a new felony.
In a system whose very legitimacy is based on the consent of the governed?
As far as I’m concerned when they’re out on the street they should have the normal rights and responsibilities as much as possible. Any restrictions (like not associating with other people on probation or not owning a firearm) should be as narrowly focused as possible. And other than voter fraud itself, I can’t think of any circumstance where voting would lead to the commission of a crime.
Personally, I suspect that if felons could vote, they’d overwhelmingly vote for programs that would help keep potential criminals out of jail - welfare programs, education, employment, less draconic drug laws. Preventing them from voting is pretty much a self-perpetuating cycle.
Despite being a U.S. citizen, my entire U.S. educational experience consists of a year of kindergarten and 6 months of 1st grade at PS-41 in Manhattan. I did, however, take a course on American History in college.
I admit to having a certain outsider’s outlook.
Can they vote in Israel?
[edit]
Yes, including incarcerated felons. As Israel has no absentee ballots, polling booths are set up in prisons.
Israel has a positive right to vote. Public transportation is free on Election Day, and people unable to reach polling booths independently are provided transportation by the government.
We also have strict voter ID laws and national ID cards.
According to Robert Fulghum, that’s enough.
No, there’s a difference. And “potentially ineligible voters” is the problem I have highlighted here in our many discussions. Without a voter ID system, it’s impossible to know how many ineligible voters participated. It’s a low number, almost certainly – less than a hundred in a state the size of Washington, for example, and under ordinary circumstances that small a number would be negligible. If the election is decided by a 15,000 vote margin, do we really care if 100 ineligible votes marred that total?
Of course not.
But in 2006, Washington State’s gubernatorial race was decided by a razor-thin margin. And in that kind of circumstance, we DO care if 100 ineligible voters participated.
And that has always been my argument: the issue is voter confidence in the outcome of races, especially close races. And that makes POTENTIALLY ineligible voters a big deal.
I was not aware of that.
And I concluded he was making an argument that was US-centric because he said:
I admit I’m no expert on Israel’s foundational documents, but I was sure he was quoting Jefferson’s words in the Declaration of Independence – a quintessential American document.
Felons vote in Spain. You can lose your right to be elected as part of a criminal sentence, but not your right to vote.
I’m reasonably sure that the notion that “governments are legitimate so long as the governed agree they are (when they do not, you get revolts)” was listed in my own classes about the Spanish Constitution and the structure of our legal system, but it wasn’t attributed.