 |
| Wilfredo Lee/AP |
This past week, Florida voters passed an amendment that can restore the right to vote to over a million citizens guilty of any felony with the exception of murder or sexual offenses. These individuals now have the ability to participate in the government again after serving their sentences or probationary periods. The previous policy made applying for restoration of civil rights an extremely difficult and lengthy process that not many could complete.
About 64% of Florida voters voted in favor of this amendment to grant ex-felons the right vote, not only increasing the potential size of the Florida electorate, but also leaving just two states, Iowa and Kentucky, left with voting bans on felons. Statistics show that the additional voters will add to Democratic power in the state due to an ex-felon's likely support of the Democratic party. Despite this notion, support for the amendment came from both the Democratic and the Republican parties as the people of Florida made clear their desire for every citizen to have the ability to vote.
The 2018 mid-terms have made significant changes to the U.S. government, such as restoring voting rights in Florida or securing a Democratic control over the House of Representatives. This amendment is a huge step forward for representation of citizens in Florida, and on a larger scale, the United States, as Florida has historically been an important swing state in presidential elections. How could changes such as this one in Florida affect any legislation or policies in the future?
Links:
https://www.npr.org/2018/11/07/665031366/over-a-million-florida-ex-felons-win-right-to-vote-with-amendment-4
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/in-florida-amendment-4-restores-more-than-a-right-to-vote
https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-america/2018/11/09/why-the-restoration-of-felons-voting-rights-in-florida-is-a-big-deal
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/11/florida-just-passed-the-largest-expansion-of-voting-rights-in-decades/
9 comments:
Florida's new amendment (Amendment 4) could be a part of the trend in removing or reducing laws that take away suffrage privileges from criminals. Although it appears that Florida has loosened its restrictions and has become similar to other states, I don't think this trend would lead to a federal law being passed anytime soon. The degrees of felony disenfranchisement (the act of barring people charged with felonies from voting) still vary from state to state, so it won't be easy to find common ground if we were to propose a national law. This might not be a trend at all, given that there has been much back-and-forth legislation in the states regarding the strictness of criminal disenfranchisement over the past decade.
I think this is a good thing. I do think these people should be able to vote, because although they are criminals, they still have opinions and the right to choose how their country's policies and laws affect their day to day lives after serving their sentences. I definitely don't think it will become a national law, at least not anytime soon, but this might have a significant impact on Florida as a swing state. I think overall policies and legislation will have more Democratic votes in the state, as Michele mentioned that ex criminals tend to be more Democratic, but I'm not sure how it will affect the state in the general election. There is a chance that in the coming years Florida will be a Democratic state when it comes to voting for President, but we will have to see.
Yes! This is huge. For so long mass incarceration has existed as a form of voter suppression. Not only are most "criminals" put into jail for low-level offenses such as marijuana possession, these people are disproportionately Latino, Native American and black. This is obviously racial profiling, as numerous studies have found that white and black people use marijuana at the same rates.
And so these people put into jail are deprived of their right to vote. So they can't change the broken judicial system. This cycle repeats itself again and again -- Michelle Alexander referred to this concept in her book "The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the age of Colorblindness." Just as Jim Crow laws suppressed black people's votes through literacy tests and other financial qualifications, mass incarceration and the war on drugs serves as a way to silence the democratic voice of people of color.
While criminals may have committed some sort of offense, they are still human and have their own opinions. However, I do think that the level of offense does matter when it comes to allowing criminals to vote. It would be unfair for someone who committed a Low-level offense like embezzlement to vote, but I think it is fair prohibiting someone who committed a high-level offense such as armed robbery to vote. Furthermore, allowing people who have been in jail for a long time may lead to uninformed voters about current issues, which may serve to be a major problem.
By providing the felons with their votes, they are also granted their voice within American politics. I, personally, didn't know that states had enacted such laws that prevented felons from voting, but now knowing this, I do not understand why these were put into place to begin with. I see no reason for preventing someone the right to vote based off of petty crimes/lower level crimes, for example, shoplifting or drug possession. Their sentences seem to be enough punishment as it is, and by doing this as well, it strips them down even further in terms of the rights they have. I'm not sure what the ramifications of this will be on a federal level, and I don't think there will be too much of a change to begin with, but it overall paints a better picture of a nation that is so focused on emphasizing its democratic status.
While taking away the right to vote seems like a serious punishment, the fact stands that many citizens right now, who have the right to vote, do not use their right. Nevertheless, I believe that expanding the right to vote for ex-felons with minor crimes is a step in the right direction. Even if the effects are limited, those ex-felons who wish to vote should be able to. Possessing marijuana is a minor crime that does not necessarily impede mental judgement and they should still have a right in matters that are important to the -- i.e healthcare reform, gun control, and tax reform.
I think that this new amendment that has been made was a good idea, and has given more people a second chance to vote. This gives more people a reason to be involved in our current politics especially if they are the ones being involved. However passing this as a law in various other states is a very time consuming long process that won’t be helped for a while, even if this could become a popular trend in the far future.
"Felons are more likely to support Democrats." Pretty ironic when you put it that way. On a more serious note, felons definitely shouldn't be censored for life from a single mistake in their past. People have the capacity to improve and change as life goes on. On the other hand, a felon is typically someone who is convicted of a crime more serious than a minor misdemeanor. They were sentenced for a reason, and restrictions are imposed to ensure their punishment. I'm still split on this issue, but I guess allowing more people to vote is always a good step when it comes to promoting democracy.
"Felons are more likely to support Democrats." Pretty ironic when you put it that way. On a more serious note, felons definitely shouldn't be censored for life from a single mistake in their past. People have the capacity to improve and change as life goes on. On the other hand, a felon is typically someone who is convicted of a crime more serious than a minor misdemeanor. They were sentenced for a reason, and restrictions are imposed to ensure their punishment. I'm still split on this issue, but I guess allowing more people to vote is always a good step when it comes to promoting democracy.
Post a Comment