Felon Disenfranchisement

[Belsnickel]

I know this is an imperfect poll, I'm not using the results in my article or anything, but what do you all think about this issue?

A little background, not a ton, but there are several different ways this is handled in this country. Two states allow felons to vote while incarcerated. Some allow felons to vote while under parole or probation, some only under probation and not parole, and some do not allow felons to vote even after they have finished their sentences. All in all, according to The Sentencing Project, a little over 6 million people in this country are unable to vote due to felon disenfranchisement. I'm curious what your thoughts are on this beyond just the poll.

[*michaelsean*]

I used to think felons shouldn't vote. Probably because that's the way it was. Now I'd say once they are out of prison and off parole.

[Dill]

(04-18-2018, 02:39 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I know this is an imperfect poll, I'm not using the results in my article or anything, but what do you all think about this issue?

A little background, not a ton, but there are several different ways this is handled in this country. Two states allow felons to vote while incarcerated. Some allow felons to vote while under parole or probation, some only under probation and not parole, and some do not allow felons to vote even after they have finished their sentences. All in all, according to The Sentencing Project, a little over 6 million people in this country are unable to vote due to felon disenfranchisement. I'm curious what your thoughts are on this beyond just the poll.

Permanent disenfranchisement--that is the choice of people aren't comfortable with Democracy, among them people who also notice this shaves off percentages of minority voters, since they are over-represented in prison--not to mention those who might vote for legalizing marijuana.

Allowing felons to vote in prison or returning the vote once time is served would help with rehabilitation.

Permanently marking someone as "evil" and a second-class citizen doesn't help people identify with their communities or feel citizenship responsibilities.

[CKwi88]

Never.

[fredtoast]

Never.

Prisoners still retain most of their rights. We can't torture them, or use them as slaves. They are still entitled to due process. We can't seize their personal property just because they are felons. So I have no idea why they should not be allowed to vote. They are still citizens that are effected by laws. So they are still entitled to representation through voting.

[*michaelsean*]

I have to admit the people who think it's OK to vote in prison confuses me a bit. I really didn't think that would be a big number. If we can take away someone's freedom I don't see any issue with taking away their voting rights. It's just part of the sentence, and when their sentence is through then I have no problem with them voting again.

[*michaelsean*]

(04-18-2018, 04:01 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Never.

Prisoners still retain most of their rights.  We can't torture them, or use them as slaves.  They are still entitled to due process.  We can't seize their personal property just because they are felons.  So I have no idea why they should not be allowed to vote.  They are still citizens that are effected by laws.  So they are still entitled to representation through voting.

I believe technically we can use them as slaves.  Unless something has been worked out since the 13th amendment.  
Yes they retain some rights, but some are removed. This is one that's removed. We also don't let them own guns.

[SunsetBengal]

I believe that they should have their rights restored, once their debt to society has been satisfied. By that I mean, completion of sentence, successfully completed parole, no longer on probation, etc. Felons have broken laws serious enough to be deemed a danger to society, and they lose their constitutional rights for that reason. However, once they have fulfilled their penal obligation, they should be readmitted into society and thus given their full rights back.

[Yojimbo]

I like Norway’s system. The politicians actually hold televised debates from inside the prisons. Their reasoning is, politicians are making decisions that affect prisoners even while in prison and so a prisoners voice should be heard.

[Yojimbo]

(04-18-2018, 04:06 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I believe that they should have their rights restored, once their debt to society has been satisfied. By that I mean, completion of sentence, successfully completed parole, no longer on probation, etc. Felons have broken laws serious enough to be deemed a danger to society, and they lose their constitutional rights for that reason. However, once they have fulfilled their penal obligation, they should be readmitted into society and thus given their full rights back.

Nobody should ever lose their rights protected by the Constitution, because the Constitution doesn’t grant those rights, we are born with them. They are unalienable rights that no man can or should take from you.

*Guess I should clarify. I believe what I wrote above, unless you’ve done something that infringes on somebody else’s rights. Doing that forfeits your own rights, but I don’t think has to be ALL of your rights.

[*michaelsean*]

(04-18-2018, 04:14 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Nobody should ever lose their rights protected by the Constitution, because the Constitution doesn’t grant those rights, we are born with them.

Freedom and the right to own a firearm are taken away.  Your freedom of speech is also curtailed while in privacy. Your freedom against searches is also taken away.

[SunsetBengal]

(04-18-2018, 04:14 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Nobody should ever lose their rights protected by the Constitution, because the Constitution doesn’t grant those rights, we are born with them. They are unalienable rights that no man can or should take from you.

The United States is not unique in the idea of convicts losing their rights.  Pretty sure that most Nations have some sort of similar system where someone who does wrong loses their right to walk around and enjoy the same privileges as ordinary citizens.

[Belsnickel]

(04-18-2018, 04:06 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I believe technically we can use them as slaves.  Unless something has been worked out since the 13th amendment.  
Yes they retain some rights, but some are removed. This is one that's removed. We also don't let them own guns.

You are correct. Slavery and involuntary servitude are unconstitutional, except for punishment for a crime. This is one of the things that fuels the mass incarceration industry in the US. Enslaved citizens providing us with potatoes, making skimpy undies for our women, sorting our recycling, etc.

(04-18-2018, 04:14 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Nobody should ever lose their rights protected by the Constitution, because the Constitution doesn’t grant those rights, we are born with them. They are unalienable rights that no man can or should take from you.

Interesting to note is that we do not have a positive right to vote from the constitution. The right to vote is protected from specific infringements, but as long as the states do not use these specific reasons to deny someone the right to vote they have free reign.

[*michaelsean*]

(04-18-2018, 04:19 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: You are correct. Slavery and involuntary servitude are unconstitutional, except for punishment for a crime. This is one of the things that fuels the mass incarceration industry in the US. Enslaved citizens providing us with potatoes, making skimpy undies for our women, sorting our recycling, etc.


Interesting to note is that we do not have a positive right to vote from the constitution. The right to vote is protected from specific infringements, but as long as the states do not use these specific reasons to deny someone the right to vote they have free reign.

I don't mind inmates doing work for the prison say growing food or making furniture, and doing work for the state like making government furniture, but I am opposed to selling their labor to any private company or for that matter having private prisons. Prisons should never be for someone to make a profit.

[*PhilHos*]

I have literally agreed with everything michaelsean has said in this thread.




This post has NOT been paid for by michaelsean.

[Belsnickel]

(04-18-2018, 04:24 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I don't mind inmates doing work for the prison say growing food or making furniture, and doing work for the state like making government furniture, but I am opposed to selling their labor to any private company or for that matter having private prisons. Prisons should never be for someone to make a profit.

I have some bad news for you...

I get what you are saying to an extent, I just have a problem because the systems in place, even the ones where they aren't working for a private industry, are exploitative in nature.

[Belsnickel]

(04-18-2018, 04:03 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I have to admit the people who think it's OK to vote in prison confuses me a bit. I really didn't think that would be a big number. If we can take away someone's freedom I don't see any issue with taking away their voting rights. It's just part of the sentence, and when their sentence is through then I have no problem with them voting again.

I missed this, but another interesting part of this is that disenfranchisement is not considered punitive. Trop v. Dulles established that it is a state exercising their control over the franchise and not a punishment. This is why permanent disenfranchisement has stood to this point, because it could be considered cruel and unusual as permanent disenfranchisement would be disproportional in many instances were it considered to be a punishment.

I wish I had a good way to share these pdfs that I have for my research.

[Au165]

It confuses me that we think this is a good idea to take someone's right to vote. Why is it because they are in prison they are no less affected by decisions made by their representatives? Hyperbole here, but if there is a party running to kill all people currently incarcerated in prison should they not get a vote in that? What all the sudden makes people less American for being in prison?

Maybe not local issues due to where they are incarcerated at not really being relevant to their true residence but I'd say in state and federal elections they should have a vote at all times.

[*michaelsean*]

(04-18-2018, 04:37 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I missed this, but another interesting part of this is that disenfranchisement is not considered punitive. Trop v. Dulles established that it is a state exercising their control over the franchise and not a punishment. This is why permanent disenfranchisement has stood to this point, because it could be considered cruel and unusual as permanent disenfranchisement would be disproportional in many instances were it considered to be a punishment.

I wish I had a good way to share these pdfs that I have for my research.

I wasn't aware of that, but personally I consider it punitive.  That's why when I really thought about it, it seemed when your imprisonment/parole was over, then you should be able to vote.   

[*michaelsean*]

(04-18-2018, 04:32 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I have some bad news for you...

I get what you are saying to an extent, I just have a problem because the systems in place, even the ones where they aren't working for a private industry, are exploitative in nature.

In what way do you mean?  Like I said, if they do work that benefits the prison or the state I have no problem.  And I understand people who sell food, bedding whatever to the prison will make a profit so that's an exception although necessary.