Felon disenfranchisement Essay

The root of Felon Disenfranchisement can be traced back to Greek and Roman laws. Where any person convicted of an infamous crime would lose his or her right to participate in polis. In Rome they would lose their right to participate in suffrage and to serve in the Roman legions. With the founding of the United States of America, the US Constitution gave the right to establish voting laws to the states. From 1776 - 1821 eleven states included felony disenfranchisement in their laws (Voter Registration Protection Act). By 1868 when the fourteenth Amendment was enacted eighteen states had adopted disenfranchisement laws. After the Civil War felony Disenfranchisement laws were used along with poll taxes and literary test to exclude African

With the loss of 6.1 million voters in the election of 2016, this would make a huge impact on the votes in the United States. The four states that have the most percentage of disenfranchisement are Kentucky (26 percent), Virginia (22 percent), Florida (21 percent), and Tennessee (21 percent). Only two states have restrictions Maine and Vermont and only 12 states have prison, parole, probation, and post sentencing. Florida, Iowa, and Kentucky also banned convicts for the rest of their lives. “The felon and ex-felon populations may be large, but how many of them would actually turn out to vote? Overall

About 5.26 million people with a felony conviction are not allowed to vote in elections. Each state has its own laws on disenfranchisement. Nine states in America permanently restrict felons from voting while Vermont and Maine allow felons to vote while in prison. Proponents of felon re-enfranchisement believe felons who have paid their debt to society by completing their sentences should have all of their rights and privileges restored. They argue that efforts to block ex-felons from voting are unfair, undemocratic, and politically or racially motivated. Opponents of felon voting say the restrictions are consistent with other voting limitations such as age, residency, mental capacity, and other felon

Individuals convicted of a felony should not lose their right to vote. The right to vote is a

“We let ex-convicts marry, reproduce, buy beer, own property and drive. They don’t lose their freedom of religion, their right against self-incrimination… they can’t be trusted to help choose our leaders… If we thought criminals could never be reformed, we wouldn’t let them out of prison in the first place (Chapman, Steve).” Many believe that felons should be able to vote due to the fact that they served their time in prison and already received their consequence. When felons already served their time, they are told they have their “freedom”. Yet, they do not have the same rights they did before they were arrested. Felons have paid enough of a price by serving their assigned sentence which shouldn’t lead

Felons need voting rights too! Felons and voting rights are starting to become a big deal. Felons are wanting the right to vote, but some states will not give them that right. All states should let felons vote depending on how severe their crime was. It is not right to deny someone the right to vote. There are multiple reasons for why they shouldn't vote, but there are also some good reasons or why they should be able to vote. Felons deserve the right to vote for multiple reasons.

Many views have been made on ex-felon’s voting right. People debate on whether or not the people who have committed these crimes should be able to vote or if that right should be taken away. The majority of people believe the individuals who commit these crimes should still retain their right to vote, which is true.

According to “Why Felons Shouldn’t Vote” article by Roger Clegg in the New York Times, if citizens are not able to follow the law then they can’t demand the right to choose those who make the law. Clegg claims that felons in general can’t make good decisions and most of the time felons do go back to prison once they get out. That’s why the government

“There is an estimated number of 5.85 million Americans who are prohibited from voting due to laws that disenfranchise citizens convicted of felony offenses.” (Uggen). Varying by state, each disenfranchisement law is different. Only 2 out of 50 U.S. states; Vermont & Maine, authorize voting from convicted felons incarcerated and liberated as shown in (Fig. 1). But of the 48 remaining states these rights are either prohibited or authorized in at least 5 years succeeding to liberation. This disenfranchisement needs to be retracted due to fact that convicted felons; incarcerated or liberated, are U.S. citizens who are guaranteed constitutional rights that should allow them as citizens to have equal opportunity in political and social

A felon is a person who has been convicted of a crime, serving time for it in a prison and could go as far as being sentenced to life or death. Those convicted of a felony can be categorized as those who have committed murder, rape, or aggravated theft or assault; it is because of this that prisoners, especially felons are believed and prohibited from the right to vote — a right that has been fought for which led to bloodshed in the United States. Those in favor of the prohibition of the prisoners’ right to vote believe that they are unfit to do so because of the poor choices and bad judgements which led them to their associated predicaments. Although there are others that believe that the price is paid for the prisoners’ gain reciprocity by being

In 2016, about 2.5% of the adult US population, or 6.1 million potential voters, were deprived of the right to vote because of a felony conviction. (Kozlowska) A felony is defined as “a crime, typically one involving violence, regarded as more serious than a misdemeanor, and usually punishable by imprisonment for more than one year or by death,” including murder, the sale or manufacture of drugs, treason, and even tax evasion. (Google) Disenfranchisement is the state of being deprived of a right or privilege, especially the right to vote. The question of whether or not ex-felons should be disenfranchised is still discussed today; some believe that ex-felons can repay their debt to society by not voting, and some, vice versa. Unfortunately,

The voice of millions of Americans can’t be heard due to the disenfranchisement laws, which is vital living in a country that depends on votes for elected officials. There are many supporters and non-supporters of the disenfranchisement laws, and “since 1975 there have been 13 states that liberalized their laws, 11 states have passed further limitations on felons, and 3 states have passed both laws” (Manza, 2004). There is an on going debate among citizens and states whether or not to amend the disenfranchisement laws and allow more convicted ex-felons to use their voting rights. Some believe their voting rights should not be restored, because they are criminals, and it’s a part of being a criminal. Others are fighting that their voting rights should be restored, that people make mistakes, and if they have completed their sentence then they have served their punishment. Research shows a consensus

Although some states believe that voting is a privilege that can be taken away after intolerable behavior, ex-criminals should be given voting rights because they are heavily impacted by government decisions, the vote is consequently taken away from low income, minority factions, and the US has a historical record of disenfranchising people regarding their race, color, previous servitude, and sex, so we have reason to question the disenfranchisement of other minorities.

More studied than the effect of felon disenfranchisement on individuals is the effect on the wider community. These laws diminish the voice of the Black community in multiple ways. First, they generally dilute the power of the Black vote, particularly because the disenfranchised population of a city tends to be concentrated in relatively few neighborhoods. For example, a 1992 study “showed that 72% of all of New York State's prisoners came from only 7 of New York City's 55 community board districts,” and a 2003 study showed that “53% of Illinois prisoners released in 2001 returned to Chicago, and 34% of those releases were concentrated in 6 of 77 Chicago communities.” This is problematic because, as law professor Debra Parkes summarizes: “When the views of one group are systematically cut out of the political process, the public debate will be skewed.” When the disenfranchised are concentrated in few neighborhoods, the political power of those neighborhoods is reduced.

After felons leave a prison or a jail, they sometimes have a hard time fitting and becoming an active part of society. “If felons are given the right to vote they are three times less likely to commit future crimes” (Kander 6). If felons are voting and becoming active members of society, then they will not be committing crimes and will not be going back to prison. The main purpose of prisons and jails is rehabilitation and voting will give felons a second chance. “Studies have shown that people with felony convictions who vote had a lower recidivism rate than non-voters.” (Kander 5). That proves that if given a second chance felons will more than often choose the righteous path and rehabilitate themselves.