What If Felons Could Vote?
April 21, 2008 by Marc Lamont Hill
Millions of people in the U.S. can’t vote because of felony convictions. Restoring their right to vote means restoring democracy.
What if 5.3 Million More Americans Could Vote?
By Erika Wood
This is a big year for American democracy. Hundreds of thousands of new voters are not only registering, but are actually showing up at the polls. States whose primary races have never counted before are suddenly the center of attention. Voters in Wyoming, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Kentucky, who have long gone ignored during primary season, finally find themselves with a voice and a vote. This year they matter.
Despite this, our democracy still falls far short of its promise to be a government that truly represents the will of its citizens. Across the country there are 5.3 million Americans who are denied the right to vote because of a felony conviction in their past. Nearly 4 million of these people are not in prison; they live, work, pay taxes, and raise families in our communities, but remain disenfranchised for years, often for decades, and sometimes for life.
States vary widely on when they restore voting rights to former prisoners. Maine and Vermont do not disenfranchise people with convictions; even prisoners may vote there. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia disenfranchise people only while they are incarcerated; five states disenfranchise those who are incarcerated or on parole, but allow people on probation to vote; 20 states disenfranchise people in prison, on parole, and on probation; and 10 states permanently disenfranchise some categories of people who have completed their correctional supervision. Kentucky and Virginia are the last two remaining states that permanently disenfranchise all people with felony convictions, unless they apply for and receive individual, discretionary clemency from the governor.
Jim Crow Roots
To fully appreciate how these laws compromise our democracy, it is important to understand their deep roots in the troubled history of American race relations. In the late 1800s these laws spread as part of a larger backlash against the adoption of the Reconstruction Amendments — the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution — which ended slavery, granted equal citizenship to freed slaves, and prohibited racial discrimination in voting.
Over time, Southern Democrats sought to solidify their hold on the region by modifying voting laws in ways that would exclude African-Americans from the polls. Despite their newfound eligibility to vote, many freed slaves remained effectively disenfranchised.
Violence and intimidation were rampant. The legal barriers employed — including literacy tests, residency requirements, grandfather clauses, and poll taxes — while race-neutral on their face, were intentional barriers to African-American voting.
Felony disenfranchisement laws were a key part of this effort. Between 1865 and 1900, 18 states adopted laws restricting the voting rights of criminal offenders. By 1900, 38 states had some type of felon voting restriction, most of which disenfranchised convicted felons until they received a pardon. At the same time, states expanded the criminal codes to punish offenses that they believed targeted freedmen, including vagrancy, petty larceny, miscegenation, bigamy, and receiving stolen goods. Aggressive arrest and conviction efforts followed, motivated by the practice of “convict leasing,” whereby former slaves were convicted of crimes and then leased out to work the very plantations and factories from which they had ostensibly been freed. Thus targeted criminalization and felony disenfranchisement combined to produce both practical re-enslavement and the legal loss of voting rights, usually for life, which effectively suppressed the political power of African Americans for decades.
The disproportionate impact of felony disenfranchisement laws on people of color continues to this day. Nationwide, 13 percent of African-American men have lost the right to vote, a rate that is seven times the national average. In eight states, more than 15 percent of African-Americans cannot vote due to a felony conviction, and four of those states — Arizona, Iowa, Kentucky, and Nebraska — disenfranchise more than 20 percent of their African-American voting-age population.
- Categories: MLH
- |
Advertisement
4 Comments
1. Constructive Feedback wrote:
Why are the “Jim Crow Roots” a key determining factor for you in this case but…..when one looks at the “Jim Crow Roots” of the various attempts to confiscate guns from our common ancestors – this fact has little bearing on your policy position on that Constitutional Right?
April 21, 2008 @ 9:59 am2. jasmine wrote:
i am often amazed that this isn’t a bigger news item…especially as our prison industrial system is growing so rapidly…and we KNOW who’s in them. who the hell needs the voting rights act if tons of people have been convicted of a felony.
hell, if convicted felons don’t have the right to vote, they don’t have one of the central rights of citizenship. if that is the case, they should be exempt from other obligations of citizenship…like paying taxes!
3. LTW wrote:
Felony disenfranchisement makes even less sense when you consider the federal government’s policy allowing felons to serve in the armed services.
The AP reported today that the number of soldiers admitted to the Army with felony records more than doubled, (249 in 2006 to 511 in 2007) and the number of Marines with felonies rose from 208 to 350. Admittedly, these are not huge numbers of people. All the same, I’d like my government to apply the same rules to those standing in line to vote as it does to those standing in line to fight.
4. Garrett wrote:
Voting isn’t an obligation of citizenship, it’s a priveledge, one that many people choose not to exercise.
A felon doesn’t deserve to have the right to vote.
Want to vote? Don’t committ a felony.
April 24, 2008 @ 5:59 amLeave a Reply

- Advertise with us
- Advertise with us
Advertisements
Recent Comments
- WPD on Is The Occupy Wall Street Movement More Racist Than The Tea Party? said "Dr" Hill is pathetic.

- Esty on Is The Occupy Wall Street Movement More Racist Than The Tea Party? said Occupy Wall St. is just straight stupid. I work on ...

- F Mize on OPEN POST said Marc, I saw your interview on O'reilly tonight and ...

- View More Comments


