As much as I abhor long posts, I seem to have a lot of spare time today. Or maybe I'm just procrastinating to avoid working on a Sunday. In either case, I've got kind of a sound-byte format going on here, so this shouldn't be too boring.
Will Robinson wrote:I'm not proposing the other options, just pointing out the fact that altruism or compassion isn't their motive.
I've already agreed with you on their motive, I just couldn't resist a little off-topic jab.
Will Robinson wrote:As to the simple majority thing... Do you mean the appointment of judges and wasn't it written that way in the constitution and somewhere along the way they just adopted their new method without changing the law? So actually, going back to following the rules doesn't bother me....
Actually I had in mind this thread:
phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=4539&highlight=
However, we were juggling three issues in that thread and I never heard any more about the main one. Anyway, my little "I know you are but what am I" comment was also admittedly off-topic.
So back on topic:
I learned a helluva lot from reading Dissent's linked articles. Since most of us don't have time to read these things, I'll post some highlights:
But last year Alabama Republican Party Chairman Marty Connors stated a bald truth: "As frank as I can be," he said, "we're opposed to [restoring voting rights] because felons don't tend to vote Republican."
Looks like Democrats aren't the only ones viewing this issue from a self-serving perspective.
Just last year, Connecticut Republican Gov. John G. Rowland signed a bill that will allow convicted felons on probation to vote beginning this year.
OK, so at least one Republican appears to overcome partisanship in his thinking on this topic. A reminder not to stereotype and generalize.
Does this sound like a prescription for more crime? It certainly undermines a basic tenet of our system of justice: that the weight of punishment is tempered with the hope of rehabilitation.
We tend to forget that our penal system isn't just about punishment, but also rehabilitation. Or do we truly believe in the rehabilitation part?
Manza and Uggen also estimate that Al Gore would have defeated George W. Bush by between 10,000 and 85,000 votes in Florida--unsurprising since Bush only earned six percent of the black vote in that state. The ironic result is that a man who ran partly on the theme of redemption, and turned his life around at age 40, may well be president because civil redemption wasn't offered to more than 500,000 ex-felons in the state his brother governs.
Ouch.
The United States incarcerates more people per capita than any other country in the world. Eighteen European democracies permit incarcerated prisoners to vote, as do Canada and Puerto Rico. In the U.S., only the states of Maine and Vermont do so. No democracy other than the United States bars parolees from voting.
I just threw that one in there because I know how much we give a rat's rectum about the rest of the world.
Most people know this is wrong. Eighty percent responding to a July 2002 Harris poll said ex-felons should have their rights restored automatically
Interesting, the vast majority of citizens are for restoring felons' voting rights. How is it then that it is so difficult to get legislation passed that will do so? The obvious answer is that our administrative and legislative government is not doing their job in representing the will of the people. Of course, we can't have the judicial branch try to do so, so I guess we're stuck.
After all, one can hardly compare a nonviolent drug offense for marijuana use, let's say, with a felony theft or murder conviction. Many conservatives with a libertarian streak have long made the distinction between violent crime and victimless crime, and properly so.
Fair enough, and easy to implement.
Instead of confronting the fact that a grossly disproportionate amount of crime is committed by black men, however, certain black leaders have turned it around and used it as yet another example of supposed institutionalized white racism, with some actually comparing the loss of voting rights for felons to poll taxes and Jim Crow voting restrictions in the old South.
I agree with that. I hate that this is being made into a racial issue by the liberals.
Advocates usually argue from moral grounds, beginning that voting is actually a privilege not a right. Next, they argue that people who have broken the laws shouldn't be involved in making them, and that ex-felons will vote in ways that harm society and influence criminal justice policy for the worse. But only the most rehabilitated felons are likely to choose to exercise their right and there is no evidence that they choose harmful policies, even in states that allow convicts to vote while in prison.
Yes, these are the arguments we've seen in posts to this thread.
in 2002, John Conyers wrote:Rep. John Conyers from Michigan. His bill, with the Orwellian title of "The Civic Participation and Rehabilitation Act," would preempt state laws by mandating the restoration of voting rights to all felons once they've served their prison time.
So this new legilation by Senators Clinton and Kerry is actually a second go-around on this issue. It appears to be getting more press this time, however, since these are the Senators that we love to hate.
Should murderers, rapists, and thieves regain the right to vote once they've served their time? As hard as it is to believe, in 32 states they already do. Only 13 states now forbid convicted felons from voting, with just nine of these imposing lifetime bans. Two states, Vermont and Maine, even allow felons currently doing time to vote like any other citizen.
That quote was from a conservative source, complaining that too many felons and ex-felons are already given the right to vote.
Under various state laws, they are barred from voting because they have felony records. This includes not just prison inmates (48 states), parolees (33 states) and probationers (29 states)...
That quote was from a liberal source, complaining that not enough felons and ex-felons are presently given the right to vote.
The 14th Amendment permits states to deny the vote "for participation in rebellion, or other crime."
So this is currently a states issue and not a federal one. I hate to see the Federal government stamp out yet another state's right.
suffrage (suf-rij): The right to vote (see franchise). In the United States, the term is often associated with the women's movement to win voting rights. (See suffragist.)
Did anyone see the episode of the old "Man Show" in which they set up an activist booth outside a public building with the slogan "end women's suffrage"? It was quite funny, since about 9 in 10 women signed their petition.
