Talk about being naive! I always thought that all Americans were automatically guaranteed the right to vote, except those who were actually serving some sort of prison or jail term, on parole or on probation. Apparently, according to Slate.com that’s not true. What surprises me is that Slate, that liberal bastion of civil rights, is aghast that former inmates are being registered to vote.
I understand there could be some exposure to vote fraud (a criminal mind will always look for a way to beat the system, I suppose) but I hardly see that as a widespread threat to life and liberty. I’ve never heard of anyone killing 32 people in 9 minutes with illegal votes.
So, am I really naive to think that citizens who have served their sentences fully should be allowed to vote again? Or do I completely misunderstand the situation?
I’ve never understood the argument against allowing ex-felons to vote. Supposedly, voting is a privilege, and supposedly being convicted means you lose that privilege.
I’ve always believed that voting isn’t a privilege, or even a right- it’s a responsibility.
I don’t think anyone ought to lose any of their civil rights without due process. That said, losing your right to vote is an appropriate penalty for conviction of a felony, especially when combined with others.
Now, I also support a robust and responsive pardon system so that people who do reform their lives can get their right to vote back. I don’t think it ought to be automatic, though, just as the penalty imposed upon them wasn’t automatic in the first place.
We really need a Constitutional amendment enshrining the right to vote in the Constitution. If you’re an American citizen over 18, and not in prison, in an insane asylum, or in a coma, your right to vote should be absolute.
Former prosecutor here. Once you’ve paid your debt to society, including prison, community service, fines, restitution and/or probation, you should be restored to your full rights as a citizen, including the right to vote, IMHO. I don’t favor a lifetime loss of the right to vote upon conviction.
I think that current prisoners should have the right to vote. I’ve never been clear on the arguments for not letting them vote. The point of inprisonment shouldn’t be to alienate people from society as much as possible. It should be to restrict their freedoms to protect society from their actions, and to (ideally) teach them that actions have consequences. I can’t imagine that not being able to vote provides much of a deterrent. It just distorts the political landscape, especially given the disproportional conviction rates of certain classes.
I think that prisoners having the right to vote helps protect against some kinds of systematic abuse of the justice system. If convicted prisoners are ever a sizeable voting bloc, then you probably have some important issues to work out.
How would you address the problem that those prisoners would be a very large voting bloc in local elections, especially in small towns that are home to a state or federal prison?
In both cases, an individual’s constitutional rights are being removed from him for the rest of his life through the process of law and as a punishment for crimes committed. Yet, presumably, you would have no problem with lifetime gun prohibition (as, indeed, I wouldn’t) yet you have an issue with the denial of the vote.
I think it is clear that both are constitutional, and I believe both are wise. As I said before, the restoration of these rights properly ought to be individually reviewed, and the pardon system seems as good a place for this as any - itself being constitutionally authorized.
I don’t see what difference that makes. Most voters are not as informed as we’d hope they’d be. I don’t see what bearing being a convict has on voting.
The general principle that people that cannot follow the law ought not be allowed to make it doesn’t persuade you at all?
Anyway, it is clear that disenfranchisement of felons is constitutional, as it is in the Constitution:
It is clear that denying the vote is explicitly constitutional on the basis of this paragraph, and the Supreme Court has said as much in felon disenfranchisement cases citing it.
Well, if they live there, why shouldn’t they be able to vote on local issues? But a more sensible solution would be to allow them to vote absentee at their last address before going to prison.
If that made any logical sense at all, nearly the entire population would be forbidden to vote because of their inability to follow posted speed limits.
Why is this a problem? They might vote a corrupt politician into office?
I agree with RTFirefly, Elendil’s Heir, et al. - once a person is done serving their sentence for the felony, they should no longer be barred from voting.
LilShieste
Because there is a direct connection between the crime and the extended deprivation of the Constitutional right - if it is that. (That’s part of the mix too: there are conflicting rulings by circuit courts as to whether the right to bear arms is an individual right. IANAL, but I suspect it would be much more problematic to deprive someone of an unquestioned Constitutional right indefinitely beyond their prison term.)
Why? Why shouldn’t someone who’s “paid their debt to society” be automatically brought back into society in this basic way? There’s no reason to believe that voting will somehow make it easier for them to yield to the temptation of committing new crimes. You’re placing a burden here in the apparent absence of a reason, beyond ‘I think this is the way it ought to be.’
Moreover, to the extent that we allow pardon and parole boards, operating in near-invisibility to the public at large, to determine whether ex-inmates get their voting rights/privileges/whatever back, the exercise of the franchise, for these people, is subject to the arbitrary and capricious prejudices of such boards.
And part of that balancing act is that once you’ve served your sentence, it should not continue to impact the rest of your life; particularly when the crime was completely unrelated. Now, if someone were convicted of vote fraud, you might have a case. Though once the sentence has been served, I think they should be free to resume a life with all the rights other citizens have.
And I don’t care if it’s constitutional or not. That doesn’t make it right.