Summary: Can You Trust A Felon

As drug-related convictions are becoming more and more common, the lower class, which typically is involved in such convictions, becomes less represented in elections because they are not allowed to vote (Democratic Contraction? Political Consequences of Felon Disenfranchisement in the United States). Disenfranchisement is silencing voices that have a right to be heard. Felon disenfranchisement would be effective if used in cases of serious crimes such as homicide, but for small offenses such as drug possession, it should not be used.

One of the more controversial debates in today’s political arena, especially around election times, is that of felon disenfranchisement. The disenfranchisement of felons, or the practice of denying felons and ex-felons the right to vote, has been in practice before the colonization of America and traces back to early England; however, it has not become so controversial and publicized until recent times. “In today’s political system, felons and ex-felons are the only competent adults that are denied the right to vote; the total of those banned to vote is approximately 4.7 million men and women, over two percent of the nation’s population” (Reiman 3).

Anyhow, there are people who believe that felons should not be given the right to vote once they are out due to the fact that they have broken the law and don’t have the right to choose a leader. For instance, the declaration of Independence states that unalienable rights include life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It does not say life, liberty and the right to vote. John Locke, who played an important part in the founding of America, also believed that each individual had certain rights that by nature they were entitled to, however, he also believed that the government had a duty to protect those rights. If someone violates another’s rights to life, liberty and property, then they forfeit their own rights to these things and society can punish him by removing their rights. The criminal has broken their social contract and violated the trust of their fellow citizens. In addition, not everyone is allowed to vote. Children, non citizens and those mentally incompetent are among those whose rights. “Voting requires certain minimum, objective standards of trustworthiness, loyalty and responsibility, and those who have

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

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.

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.

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

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

The citizens of the United States of America have a long history of having to fight for their right to vote, and while women and people of color do have the right, another group of people is facing a difficult time being able to vote. This other group is the felons, but understandably so: a felon’s ability to make critical decisions for the United country is sure to be questioned. Felon disenfranchisement serves as a barrier between individuals who are qualified to vote and those who are not. The reasons that felons are not qualified to make such important decisions for Americans is that their actions show a lack of good judgement and they show a disregard for the social contract. The ignorance toward the social contract, the types of felonies committed, and the judgement that felons have is questioned, and exactly what the impact may be in regard to our society and the future of our country is explained. There should be a few exceptions, and not all felons should suffer the same fate that those who committed a serious felony do.

People are incarcerated for different crimes some a lot more severe than others. For example, a single parent was sentenced to 3 months for the theft of a pair of jeans worth £10 (BBC News, 2011). However, while these are viable points and questions, the government allowing certain individuals in prisons to vote could be a complicated decision. Felons’ circumstances are not simply black and white; there can be a grey area with individual cases. Appropriate retribution is said to only occur when an appropriate punishment is given for the crime (Hegel, 1965). This makes it difficult to judge who has committed a serious enough offence to enable them to be stripped of their right to vote. Streeter said, the UK decided hundreds of years ago that prisoners should not have the right to vote’ (Streeter, 2011). This is a settled view in this country which has been accepted since 1870 (Hollobone, 2011). ‘Do we want convicted murderers, rapists and paedophiles to be given the vote?’ (BBC News, 2010). In terms of making the right decision and having it morally and politically justifiable, felons should not be allowed to vote and it is nonsensical to think they should.

“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

About 6.1 million Americans convicted of a felony have been barred from voting by the law in most states (Chung 1). The condition regarded to as felon disenfranchisement is controlled by laws provided for by the individual states within the US. Unlike the states of Maine and Vermont which allow felons the right to vote while in incarceration, most other states have withdrawn the right from convicts. Ten states in the country have permanently restricted specific felons from participating in elections. With the argument that the country’s legacy in safeguarding democracy through felon disenfranchisement, opponents of the idea assert that by completing their sentences, felons have paid the debt owed to the society and should have their privileges and rights fully restored. They further assert that part of the efforts to uphold democracy is to get rid of unfair provisions such as laws advocating for felon disenfranchisement. On the other hand, proponents note that felons and ex-felons should be allowed to vote due to the expression of their poor judgment. While the debate continues to elucidate divergent views, numerous factors illustrate that felon disenfranchisement is inconsequential and does not contribute to the betterment of the country.

How would you feel if one mistake caused one of your main rights as citizens to be taken away? Today, people who have paid their dues are denied their innate right to vote and to participate in decisions that governs their lives. Convicted felons who served their time have an innate right to vote and failure to allow ex-felons to vote has a disproportionate impact on my minority communities.

Every individual deserves the right to vote despite color or gender even if they are a convicted felon. This country was founded off of freedom from declaring itself independent. Even though individuals have committed certain crimes they should at least have a way to earn their freedom back in some type of way. The first step in this process would be making it automatic in every state ,after the process of rehabilitation felons should have their rights reinstated . The reason for this statement is to clarify that anybody can make a mistake . But it should be a way that felons should one day be seen as everyone else including the right to get any job. There is no direct resolution to the problem but the nation should really be concerned with this issue.

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.